Aperture is dead

Nick

-
.
Joined
Aug 9, 2007
Messages
12,949
For those of us who have stuck with Apple's Aperture photo editing and management program, the end is near. Apple has announced that development has stopped and that no future releases of Aperture will be happening.

http://www.macrumors.com/2014/06/27/aperture-development-stops/

For me, I've kind of accepted that Lightroom was kicking Aperture's butt for a good year or more, but it's painful to switch everything over. The article mentions that Apple and Adobe are working together to create a migratory workflow to help users switch to Lightroom. I guess I'm happy I'm finally going to start using Lightroom, but this is going to suck. :facepalm:
 
I don't speak Apple, so no habla Aperture, but being forced to switch a core application always sucks. No matter what.

FWIW though, I think you'll be fine with LR. I've only been using it about a year, but have grown to like it a lot. I found the learning curve steep, but short - difficult, but didn't take long to get comfortable.

- DAA
 
Yeah, I have Lightroom, and I tried switching at the beginning of 2013, but I just hated having to change my workflow. I also liked how Aperture handles files more. But I am really excited to finally be using Lightroom, as I know it is superior. Time to suck it up...
 
  • Like
Reactions: DAA
I've been working full time in the media content creation field for 8 years now, the first three of those years were working in a Mac environment with Apple software. This doesn't surprise me one bit.

It started when Apple killed Shake.
Then Apple killed Xserve.
Then Apple started ignoring, killing, and neglecting most of their pro content creation software packages.
Then they ignored most of their pro hardware for years on end. Killed their 30 inch cinema display, etc...
Then they neutered Final Cut Pro.
Now Aperture.

It's pretty obvious at this point that Apple is no longer invested in the content creation world. Though a few are still clinging to Final Cut X. Hopefully this doesn't come across as anti-apple, I've used both extensively and love/hate both PCs and Macs equally. I'm cheap so I'm usually on a PC, but if someone bought me a Mac I would use it.

Anyway good luck with the transition. Lightroom is pretty nice.
 
That must mean the program is at perfection......like apple
 
I think once you peruse the Import functions, you'll find you can save in a very similar fashion to Aperture/Iphoto. It can run almost identical, if you want it to.

Still using LR4, and love it.
 
I use iPhoto in place of Lightroom. Even though I have Lightroom since my work pays for a creative cloud subscription for me. Why you ask? Because I am too lazy to switch my photo library and learn Lightroom.
 
Last edited:
Oh NO!!!!

You gotta be kidding me! Say it isn't so Nick. I have 60K images, many of them edited, in Aperture. My life is in Aperture. Being a software developer I am used to change and like improvement but I don' want to change this. Aperture works fine and I don't want to spend 80 hours of my life switching over. I am Light Room proficient and agree it is 5% better but see no compelling reason to switch. I will use Aperture for several years more I am sure. That does it, I am selling my AAPL stock.
 
Last edited:
Just wondering out loud - and probably not sounding very intelligent, but how hard would it be to port the meta data from Aperture over to .xmp that Lightroom could simply synch up? A migration app? There's no way anyone is going to manually markup 60K images for the LR library. I know I wouldn't!

Dunno... I've never written a line of code in my life.

- DAA
 
Just wondering out loud - and probably not sounding very intelligent, but how hard would it be to port the meta data from Aperture over to .xmp that Lightroom could simply synch up? A migration app? There's no way anyone is going to manually markup 60K images for the LR library. I know I wouldn't!

Dunno... I've never written a line of code in my life.

- DAA


It's not really necessary. You can "Add" the entire Aperture library to LR with about 5 clicks. It won't copy everything over, just copy the location of the files, and organize the thumbnails.
 
I've been working full time in the media content creation field for 8 years now, the first three of those years were working in a Mac environment with Apple software. This doesn't surprise me one bit.

It started when Apple killed Shake.
Then Apple killed Xserve.
Then Apple started ignoring, killing, and neglecting most of their pro content creation software packages.
Then they ignored most of their pro hardware for years on end. Killed their 30 inch cinema display, etc...
Then they neutered Final Cut Pro.
Now Aperture.

It's pretty obvious at this point that Apple is no longer invested in the content creation world. Though a few are still clinging to Final Cut X. Hopefully this doesn't come across as anti-apple, I've used both extensively and love/hate both PCs and Macs equally. I'm cheap so I'm usually on a PC, but if someone bought me a Mac I would use it.

Anyway good luck with the transition. Lightroom is pretty nice.

^ This. Apple has always abandoned users looking for the next big breakthrough. I work in IT for a school district and ever year we face issues because of Apple's business model. I really wish we would abandon OSX altogether and stick with windows and chromebooks. The only thing less stable than Apple products from a support standpoint is Droid.
 
It's not really necessary. You can "Add" the entire Aperture library to LR with about 5 clicks. It won't copy everything over, just copy the location of the files, and organize the thumbnails.
@Danny boy Danny boy, the problem as I see it and I think that @Dave is proposing a work around for is that Aperture (and lightroom) store the original RAW images IN the database. There are no files on the file system other than the giganormous Aperture Library. Sure Lightroom can take and import the images FROM the database but I don't believe it can import all the changes, the mods, the mods I did with my 3rd party filters, the tags, the labels, etc. etc. That is the metadata that Dave is talking about. Dave proposes writing a translation program which maybe I could do but that is part of the supreme pain of this transfer of my digital image life to a different program. @Nick has thought about this a lot and already has a plan of attack. What U going to do Nicholas?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DAA
Yep. It's all of the edits that don't carry over with the files. My plan is to wait 1-3 months until someone (hopefully Apple & Adobe) release a solution for migration. Then once that has been released all buggy and ruined other people's lives, then patched, then I'll make the move.
 
@Danny boy Danny boy, the problem as I see it and I think that @Dave is proposing a work around for is that Aperture (and lightroom) store the original RAW images IN the database. There are no files on the file system other than the giganormous Aperture Library. Sure Lightroom can take and import the images FROM the database but I don't believe it can import all the changes, the mods, the mods I did with my 3rd party filters, the tags, the labels, etc. etc. That is the metadata that Dave is talking about. Dave proposes writing a translation program which maybe I could do but that is part of the supreme pain of this transfer of my digital image life to a different program. @Nick has thought about this a lot and already has a plan of attack. What U going to do Nicholas?

ahh, I understand more now. IF I've edited something worth keeping (for me) I'll have generally exported that image as a JPG.

Changing big programs sucks. I feel your pain.
 
Is it possible just to keep old photos in Aperture but start using LR for everything from now on? My only fear with that would be some future OS update that passes up Aperture, but that would be way in the future.

This stinks because I was thinking about switching to Aperture because I REALLY don't like subscription-based software.
 
This stinks because I was thinking about switching to Aperture because I REALLY don't like subscription-based software.

This is the big problem. Adobe's move to subscription-based pricing rubs me the wrong way. But having tried both pieces of software, Lightroom really outdid Aperture.

As to the whining about Apple "abandoning" the pro market… :cry:. Logic still kicks tail and Final Cut Pro X has come along way since its introduction. The 2013 Mac Pro pushed ahead workstation computing in a way no other product has in years (albeit with a price tag). But Aperture was a losing horse and has been since the outset. It's going away so Apple can move to unifying its photo products across desktop, mobile and cloud.

People act like a changing workflow is the end of the world. It's a hassle, sure. I feel that pain. If it were Lightroom going away instead, I'd be very unhappy. But all companies end-of-life products from time to time. Such is the nature of progress.
 
Is it possible just to keep old photos in Aperture but start using LR for everything from now on?

That would be one way to ease the pain. But running a global search for all images "Beartooh" (mountains), or 4-5 star (quality), green label (published publicly), or the "wildlife" label over my 60K images can no longer occur.

When I run up against impediments like that I tend to disuse the older, orphaned, library. That is, in this case, the 60K images.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top