Re: Apple/Adobe Imaging, DAM and Workflow
Re: Apple/Adobe Imaging, DAM and Workflow
- Subject: Re: Apple/Adobe Imaging, DAM and Workflow
- From: Andrew Rodney <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 11:03:52 -0600
- Thread-topic: Apple/Adobe Imaging, DAM and Workflow
On 7/12/07 10:35 AM, "PID Jmail" wrote:
> I find myself in a position where I enjoy seeing competitors to Adobe's
> products but choose to use Adobe anyway. I was very interested when Aperture
> came out and the idea of a possible new way of working piqued my interest.
> When Adobe announced LightRoom shortly after, it stole most of my attention.
> Much of this was due to the hefty hardware requirements of Aperture when
> compared to LightRoom, but it also had a lot to do with my comfort level
> about avenues of support for Adobe products vs. Apple products.
I fall into the same camp. When I first saw Aperture and Macworld being
demo'd, I thought it was amazing! It demo's well. But after I got a copy, I
was only partially satisfied. I will not go into great detail, but I found
the initial raw rendering less than acceptable, some of the color management
features were iffy and I found Apple unwilling to answer some fundamental
questions such as what is the processing color space (to this day, I have
never received an answer but I'm pretty sure it's Adobe RGB (1998)).
On the other hand, Lightroom, while still needing a good deal of color
management functionality like soft proofing and a better numeric feedback
based on the eventual encoding space I will use, was a much better fit for
my work with raws. It supports DNG much better. There's no secrecy around
its underlying processing. I also felt that Aperture was built deep inside
Apple with little if any apparent feedback from working photographers. Not
at all the case with Lightroom or ACR.
I'd LOVE to see Apple build a Photoshop or Lightroom killer but I'm not sure
the culture of software development there would allow this.
Ultimately, we're seeing a new way to work with image processing based on
metadata editing. This isn't your fathers Live Picture! I think a great deal
of success here depends on DNG or (if Apple comes up with something better
supported) some kind of open, non proprietary container that will embed
metadata editing instructions, ideally many representing variations of image
rendering along with some kind of update-able embedded JPEG for viewing and
simple output needs. Here is where I see Adobe way in the front of the pack
and Apple dragging based on Apertures pretty dismal support of DNG
(sometimes it works, often it doesn't).
Of course, I have to be thankful for Aperture since without it, Lightroom
would probably not have been green lighted for release. Despite rumors,
Adobe was working on Shadowland for several years prior to Aperture's
release but was very, very close to getting the axe. When Aperture shipped,
that changed things. Competition is good.
Aperture has some awesome features and could be the product but Apple needs
to start asking for input from working photographers in the alpha stage, not
after its gone golden master. The public beta of both LR and Photoshop were
an excellent move on the part of Adobe and something that should be a wakeup
call to Apple.
Andrew Rodney
http://www.digitaldog.net/
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden