I have no love for adobe, and so far Media Pro is ahead by a nose, followed by Photo Director, which goes a little bit further and has lots of editing, including lens correction, but not my particular wide angle lens, of course. RAW treatment and editing can be outside the asset manager. I'll be wanting local storage & backup, and a means of managing, judging and comparing all my shots. I do about 1000 shots a month on top of day-to-day point and shoot iPhone stuff & iCloud just won't cut it for me. I'd dearly love to see Photos with good asset management capabilities, but iCloud won't be that, not even for enthusiasts. I've done some sparkling edits on iPad, but when you see them on a Mac, it's like 'who are you kidding?' Sure you can do a quick edit to a photo on iPad, maybe even a preview for the client, but professional editing will still need to be done on a large display, with lots of grunt behind it. Any more than basic triage - focus and good shot/bad shot, would be unlikely as well. Somehow, I don't see iCloud having multiple libraries, nor handling 12TB very smoothly. Overall, I see this as a very positive effort for actual photographers and amateur hobbyists to have their photos accessible on multiple devices and a faster and easier editing process. I can still choose to use Lightroom or Photoshop to do more intensive edits if needed after using Photos but at least having everything in iCloud will be much better asset management than the current storage on RAID arrays which have now gone all the way to about 12TB of data which means that I now handle multiple Aperture Libraries per assignment which definitely can't be done easily in Lightroom and forget about Adobe CC where storage is quite limited. One of the things I really like about the new controls is that Apple has combined several adjustments to a single slider control so I can quickly adjust overall exposure and white balance and then fine tune it later on should I choose. This means that I can edit EXIF, cull images, and some small edits to photos on an iPad and then continue when I get back to the studio. The new Photos App will pretty much bring my workflow up to speed so I can quickly upload RAWs and JPGs to iCloud via iPhone or iPad during or after a shoot and then allow me to quickly edit on the go on the device of my choosing. People pay me for my photos, not for my editing. I'm a professional photographer that makes 100% of my living as a photographer and the most important aspect of the job is asset management, not editing. Photos is bringing Aperture to the current state of technology. Okay, maybe combining iMovie could be a step too far, but I could absolutely see Quicktime Player being replaced with a Movies app aimed at organising your movie and TV show library, with some simple editing tools for tweaking things like home movies. But really the opposite would be better with that media library moving out into its own, movie centric app. ![]() But my point also is that Quicktime Player lacks the concept of a media library, which means it's in a kind of funny position where for many users it doesn't really do anything anymore, as it's generally better to move your movies into iTunes if you can since it organises them into a media library. So the tools in Quicktime Player in that regard are the simple tools, while iMovie's are more advanced (albeit including composition as well, but then Quicktime can copy/paste movie segments too). ![]() I'm not really convinced of the comparison there iPhoto is the basic editor compared to Aperture, but they're now being rolled together into what looks like a photo library manager, with both simple and advanced editing tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |