MacInTouch Amazon link...

Apple photo software/alternatives

Channels
Apple, Troubleshooting, Products, Questions

Ric Ford

MacInTouch
The other shoe drops...
Apple said:
Migrate your Aperture libraries to Photos or Adobe Lightroom Classic
Aperture won't run in versions of the Mac operating system after macOS Mojave. Follow these steps to move your Aperture libraries to Photos or Adobe Lightroom Classic.

In June 2014, Apple announced the discontinuation of development of Aperture. Since that time, Apple has released five major macOS updates. For technical reasons, Aperture will not run in future versions of macOS after macOS Mojave. To continue working with your Aperture photo libraries, you must migrate them to the Photos app included with macOS, or migrate them to Adobe Lightroom Classic.
How about some alternatives to Adobe and Apple Photos?
 


How about some alternatives to Adobe and Apple Photos?
Right? In that quest I've submitted a few requests to Phase One regarding the future of Capture One as an antidote to this quagmire we find ourselves in (Capture One for Linux anyone?). Or at least robust tools/capabilities for Lightroom -> Capture One migrations.

The aspect that continues to nag me about all of this is the idea of the visual history of our lives being held (virtually) hostage if we shoot/archive in any format besides JPEG (and/or subsequently archive in) TIFF.

You can argue all day "why would a software company drop support for older cameras when they've already done the development work?" I give you: end of life for certain codecs in macOS 10.15. Hello? No company to-date seems to be genuinely concerned about visual *history*. It's all about making $ right. now.
 



Given that almost five years have passed since the announcement, it is amazing that Aperture is still popular. It is now in the category of many OS X-based applications that may live on while running in virtual machines -- unless the graphics are a problem. Not ever being or supporting an Aperture user, I can't speak to that.
 



Has anyone been using gThumb under Linux on a regular basis for comparison? Have seen it included with a few distributions.
I just prefer the "Pix" image viewer/manager provided by the Linux Mint team. Here is a link to its page on GitHub which provides some details about its features and objectives:

Linux "distros" may fork and somewhat modify standard applications, such gThumb. Pix, per the details on its GitHub page, is a gThumb fork - not surprising, since Mint's own Cinnamon desktop is derived from Gnome.

Here's a link to an overview of similar Linux "photo viewer" applications at AlternativeTo:

Do note that some photo applications identified primarily with Linux are also available as native installs for Mac.

The GIMP team has recently been releasing updates on a much faster pace. Reviews are encouraging, even from some graphics designers, and it's available free for both Linux and Mac. Worth a look even if you tried and deleted it before.

The following link gets specific about using Linux for photography. While on the site, you might want to browse other pages with examples, tutorials, and more. Some of the described tools are among those available on Mac.
rileybrandt photography said:
My Open Source Photography Workflow
After several years of trial and error, I finally have a complete RAW photography workflow in Linux that I am happy with. The applications in this workflow aren’t just native to Linux, they are also free, open source software (FOSS). There is no need to dual boot, use WINE or a virtual machine. It’s a pure FOSS photography workflow running in Linux.
 


The other shoe drops...
How about some alternatives to Adobe and Apple Photos?
I migrated from Aperture to CaptureOne Pro two years ago and am very pleased with the results I am getting and with the capabilities of the software.

CaptureOne is not cheap and has a significant learning curve but there are many on-line short tutorials and longer one hour webinars all accessible from CaptureOne that help in the process.

CaptureOne will import Aperture and Lightroom catalogs along with keywords (although as a flat file and not hierarchical). You can download a fully functional 30 day trial version so my recommendation is try it out. Import some new photos and a portion of your Aperture/Lightroom catalog and see what you think. Your original Aperture/Lightroom catalogs will be left unchanged.
 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
migrated from Aperture to CaptureOne Pro two years ago and am very pleased with the results I am getting and with the capabilities of the software. CaptureOne is not cheap and has a significant learning curve but there are many on-line short tutorials and longer one hour webinars all accessible from CaptureOne that help in the process.
I bought Capture One at the end of last year, and I really like it a lot (though I'm not totally up to speed with it, and the catalog/session models can be a bit confusing). It's expensive if you need support for Nikon and other cameras (as we did), but you get a license for three computers, and it's cheaper if a Fuji or Sony-specific version covers your needs.
 


Apple said:
As an Aperture use since the beginning, I have problems with both of Apple's suggestions:

First, Photos isn't geared to photographers using RAW at 17-25 MB per shot but rather to snapshotters syncing selfies from their iPhones. On the bright side, at least it's local storage.

Secondly, the version of Lightroom that Apple says will import Aperture Libraries is "Classic", which had the last announced version in 12/2017.

Plus:
a) I don't know if Lightroom CS (cloud) will import libraries (doubtful, otherwise Apple would have mentioned it, and​
b) you can only rent it, not buy it and​
c) pushing all of those files up a crappy 11mb/s Comcast uplink.​
$10/month, plus any additional storage?

No thanks, Apple and Adobe, I'll stick with Mojave and Aperture and hop off your upgrade and money trains.
 


Secondly, the version of Lightroom that Apple says will import Aperture Libraries is "Classic", which had the last announced version in 12/2017.
Lightroom Classic 8.2.1 was released in early April 2019. The Apple link:
says "Adobe Lightroom Classic version 5.7 and later...", so v8.2.1 should support the import. But that version is subscription software, as you know.

I'm still using Lightroom 6 (perpetual license), as it fully supports all my cameras and lenses.
 


Lightroom Classic 8.2.1 was released in early April 2019. The Apple link:
says "Adobe Lightroom Classic version 5.7 and later...", so v8.2.1 should support the import. But that version is subscription software, as you know.

I'm still using Lightroom 6 (perpetual license), as it fully supports all my cameras and lenses.
Yes, that's the one (v.6.1.4), and that is non-subscription. Just don't buy any newly released cameras and lenses.
 


I bought Capture One at the end of last year, and I really like it a lot (though I'm not totally up to speed with it, and the catalog/session models can be a bit confusing). It's expensive if you need support for Nikon and other cameras (as we did), but you get a license for three computers, and it's cheaper if a Fuji or Sony-specific version covers your needs.
CaptureOne has a one hour webinar on catalogs and sessions which should clarify most issues.
 


As an Aperture use since the beginning, I have problems with both of Apple's suggestions...

... Secondly, the version of Lightroom that Apple says will import Aperture Libraries is "Classic", which had the last announced version in 12/2017.
Lightroom Classic CC is the current 'classic' desktop Lightroom, subscription-only. It is updated the same as the Cloud-based Lightroom; I am running version 8.2.1 now. It will import an Aperture catalog.

I started with Aperture when I moved from film to digital photography. When Aperture was deprecated, I tried for a while with Photos plus a variety of 3rd-party add-ons. The add-ons clearly helped, but the combination never worked as well, and the combination was considerably slower to do basic editing.

I moved to Lightroom about a year and a half ago and haven't looked back. Lightroom plus Photoshop is $11 a month. I save about 8,000 images a year (I shoot more than that, of course) as an amateur, so I needed a robust cataloging and editing tool.

I tried Capture One and found the interface to be off-putting. Affinity was in its infancy back then, so I didn't try it, but perhaps others can report. The various others (e.g., Darktable) may work, but I didn't want to futz with software, I wanted to futz with images. :-)
 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
I tried Capture One and found the interface to be off-putting.
Different strokes for different folks, I guess - I had the opposite experience, finding I like the Capture One interface more than some others, and I really appreciate Capture One's responsiveness/speed. (I never got beyond Aperture 1, and liked pre-cloud Lightroom better but didn't keep up with its updates, either.)

Affinity Photo is a very different kind of app (though it has some overlapping editing capabilities), and Affinity hasn't yet released any digital asset manager (DAM) app. Affinity Photo wasn't very speedy when I tried it (and bought a copy), and I had trouble getting comfortable with its processing modes, but they've been improving speed, among other things, and have had updated betas available.

I figure it's worth supporting Serif/Affinity, and their prices are pretty low, but Capture One is getting the job done for me currently, producing very good images with minimal fuss, as well as helping me get my photos better organized.
 



I switched to Lightroom (now Classic CC) and grudgingly accepted the CAN$11.95/month cost. (I feel better about that since by switching my 5 year-old iPhone 5S to a new, but 18-month-old design, iPhone X, Bell has added CAN$15/month to my bill this week!) The cost of film and chemicals is greater than both put together.

I like the workflow in Lightroom far better than that of Capture One, which I used to own, and I don't much care about differences in RAW conversion or camera compatibility: I'm scanning negatives and transparencies and importing TIFFs. I rarely touch the included Photoshop, as I really dislike photographs that have been altered into unreality, but it's there if I need it.

My biggest concern is that my Hasselblad Flextight X1 scanner will become a $20k paperweight, if Hasselblad don't update its software to 64-bit, as soon as my last old Mac dies.
 


Has anyone tried RAW Power from Gentleman Coders? It's a plug in for Photos that provides editing tools for RAW images and generally gets good reviews. I shoot a little RAW, and I've had concerns about using Photo as the DAM tool instead of Aperture, particularly with large RAW image files.
 


I asked this somewhere before but never got much help. Has anyone found a suitable replacement for Aperture's web gallery export feature? That's the one legacy use I have for it, the rest of my photography work I migrated to Capture One Pro a couple years ago.

I use Aperture to put together galleries like this for my transit history website. It takes the image metadata to generate short captions for the thumbnail page and long captions for the photo pages. I tweaked the Aperture template for the look I want, and to add a link back to the homepage, but it's not high-resolution screen aware, nor is it in any way responsive. Since this is a hobby project I'm not looking to spend big bucks, and Wordpress or Google Photos or something like that are not options.

Has anyone found something that can do this? If I have to export the images from Aperture (or Capture One Pro) and then have another app package them up, I could live with that, even though it's not ideal.
 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
I asked this somewhere before but never got much help. Has anyone found a suitable replacement for Aperture's web gallery export feature? That's the one legacy use I have for it, the rest of my photography work I migrated to Capture One Pro a couple years ago.
I assume Capture One's Export Web Contact Sheet feature isn't sufficient for what you want. If not, you might want to check out Jalbum ($59 for a standard license with a 30-day trial).
 


... My biggest concern is that my Hasselblad Flextight X1 scanner will become a $20k paperweight, if Hasselblad don't update its software to 64-bit, as soon as my last old Mac dies.
You might want to contact Ed Hamrick at Vuescan software. Although a driver for the Hasselblad Flextight X1 doesn't appear on their support page, they might be able to offer a solution. Their software is top-notch. I've been a satisfied customer for decades.
 


You might want to contact Ed Hamrick at Vuescan software. Although a driver for the Hasselblad Flextight X1 doesn't appear on their support page, they might be able to offer a solution. Their software is top-notch. I've been a satisfied customer for decades.
I have done that, and Ed says he can make VueScan work with the Flextights, but Hasselblad won't release to him the needed engineering specs so he can do it. If, as seems likely, they abandon their film scanners, I hope they won't be like Aesop's dog in the manger and will do so then.
 


I've been worrying about Lightroom for quite a while (since they went subscription-only) and about a year ago decided to give Luminar a go. The concern is multiplied by Mojave telling me Lightroom (6.1.4) won't run in [macOS 10.15].

They've just released Luminar version 3.1. Point it at your folder structure (the folders holding your images), and it identifies all the images therein and presents them to you with a filmstrip down the left-hand side of the screen (leaving more space than with a filmstrip at the bottom, plus Lightroom-like access to the the folder structure. So you can get at stuff. It will import new images from media.

It's different enough from Lightroom that it takes some learning, but my standard workflow with new images is: apply lens corrections; set white balance; slide the "AI image improver" until I like the result. The result's generally pretty good.

Niggles: you apparently can't tell the thing to apply lens corrections on import or when an image is first encountered.

Bottom line: give it a try. It's cheap enough and has a free trial period.
 



I have done that, and Ed says he can make VueScan work with the Flextights, but Hasselblad won't release to him the needed engineering specs so he can do it. If, as seems likely, they abandon their film scanners, I hope they won't be like Aesop's dog in the manger and will do so then.
That is really, too bad. I used Flextight software, and it won't work with the next OS upgrade.
 


Has anyone tried RAW Power from Gentleman Coders? It's a plug in for Photos that provides editing tools for RAW images and generally gets good reviews. I shoot a little RAW, and I've had concerns about using Photo as the DAM tool instead of Aperture, particularly with large RAW image files.
I use RAW Power and like it. It is inexpensive, and it uses the Apple raw engine as Aperture did - so if you like the Aperture RAW conversion and editing controls, you will like RAW Power. Version 3 of RAW Power is due out later this year - new features are being added all the time. Nik Bhatt (the developer - and former Aperture Manager at Apple) is very responsive and listens to users. Highly recommended,
 


In the context of this discussion, does anyone have comments on Luminar v3?
I use RAW Power and like it. It is inexpensive, and it uses the Apple raw engine as Aperture did
Just thinking out loud, does anything else in macOS use the RAW engine - so that Apple is likely to keep it around more than one more major rev? I'm seeing flashes of Apple dropping the RAW engine and then BOOM! end of the line. If we're learning anything the hard(er) way the last couple years, it's that we can't rely on Apple for anything beyond the base OS, and even that can be sketchy in areas.
 


I've been worrying about Lightroom for quite a while (since they went subscription-only)
and about a year ago decided to give Luminar a go. The concern is multiplied by Mojave
telling me Lightroom (6.1.4) won't run in [macOS 10.15].
I tried running Lightroom 6.14 (note that you refer to it as 6.1.4) in Mojave for the first time today, and I did get the message. But Lightroom is 64-bit and has been since at least v5, so it's not clear why this message pops up.

As a test, I made changes to NVRAM to allow only 64-bit apps to run. Launching Lightroom 6.14 starts up the application, but selecting a menu brings up the spinning cursor. Console reports the following:
Code:
Process:               AdobeIPCBroker [532]
Path:                  /Applications/Utilities/Adobe Application Manager/*/AdobeIPCBroker.app/Contents/MacOS/AdobeIPCBroker
Identifier:            AdobeIPCBroker
Version:               ???
Code Type:             X86-64 (Native)
Parent Process:        ??? [1]
Responsible:           AdobeIPCBroker [532]
User ID:               501
Date/Time:             2019-05-02 11:40:26.354 -0700
OS Version:            Mac OS X 10.14.4 (18E226)
Report Version:        12
Anonymous UUID:        64C329FD-F202-C4FE-5B22-265FA267AB93

Termination Reason:    EXEC, [0xd] This binary requires 32-bit x86 support, which has been disabled with boot-arg: -no32exec.
It appears the AdobeIPCBroker is not 64-bit. After a bit of time, the spinning cursor vanishes and Lightroom begins to function again but eventually crashes.

Summary: Lightroom 6 is probably not compatible with a 64-bit only system.

Also, see this post from Graham Needham discussing Adobe products and 64-bit mode.
 


Has anyone found a suitable replacement for Aperture's web gallery export feature?
Has anyone found something that can do this? If I have to export the images from Aperture (or Capture One Pro) and then have another app package them up, I could live with that, even though it's not ideal.
Two thoughts. One is the Capture One plug-in Prodibi. I'm not sure it can pull captions, but since it is still in beta, the developer might be willing to add the feature.

The other possibility is Softpress's Freeway and Exhibio. At present these are 32-bit apps, so won't run past Mojave, but the developer has stated he is working on 64-bit versions. I have no idea whether this will materialize, but it is worth watching to see what happens.
 



The "Photography plan" with Lightroom and Photoshop now costs $19.99/month, or are you on the Lightroom-only plan at $9.99/mo.?
I doubt anyone will be surprised - it's the new software model. Companies will 'addict' you with low pricing and once you're 'hooked' they can increase to their shareholder's content.

With Adobe it was always just a matter of time. I'm pleased I went with Capture One rather than Lightroom. Hopefully Affinity will continue to improve and I'll rid myself of Photoshop as well.
 


The "Photography plan" with Lightroom and Photoshop now costs $19.99/month, or are you on the Lightroom-only plan at $9.99/mo.?
Apparently that $19.99 plan is the one with 1 TB of storage; the $9.99 plan is still available, just not featured on their website. My suspicion (and I'm as suspicious as you ;-) is that they're testing the waters...
 


An A/B & C/D & F Test?
9to5Mac said:
Adobe doubles the price of its $10/month Creative Cloud plan for Photoshop and Lightroom
Adobe gave an official response to PetaPixel that essentially said the pricing change might be a test, only seen by some users.
“From time to time, we run tests on Adobe.com which cover a range of items, including plan options that may or may not be presented to all visitors to Adobe.com. We are currently running a number of tests on Adobe.com.”
TidBits said:
Aperture Won’t Run after macOS 10.14 Mojave
in the next major release of macOS after macOS 10.14 Mojave, citing “technical reasons.” Although Apple is dropping support for 32-bit Mac apps in macOS 10.15 (see “macOS 10.14 Mojave Will Be the Last to Support 32-Bit Apps,” 12 June 2018), that isn’t the reason, because Aperture has been a 64-bit app since version 3.0
Compared to my earlier experiences when Microsoft seemed to use releases of MS-DOS, and later Windows, to kill third-party software, with peripherals also at danger, my Apple experience has been better. Still, it seems there's always something, from that Brother P-Touch Label Printer to my ScanSnap S1300, things that needn't have died?

Until seeing the TidBits statement that Aperture isn't a 32-bit app, I'd assumed that was the cause of death.

Just for curiosity and the sake of discussion, is anyone here a software coroner with knowledge of what other "technical reasons" will keep Aperture from running in macOS 10.15?
 


Apparently that $19.99 plan is the one with 1 TB of storage; the $9.99 plan is still available, just not featured on their website. My suspicion (and I'm as suspicious as you ;-) is that they're testing the waters...
They are, indeed, testing the waters. Not all countries/locations are seeing the new price. There is an article on PetaPixel discussing this—and in an update at the bottom includes a link that will take you to the old price.
 


Summary: Lightroom 6 is probably not compatible with a 64-bit only system.
Interestingly, Lightroom 5 runs just fine in a 64-bit only system. One big difference between Lr5 and Lr6 is the phone-home license (yes, even in the perpetual license version) in Lr6. It would appear that these are part of the problem with Lr6.
 


The "Photography plan" with Lightroom and Photoshop now costs $19.99/month, or are you on the Lightroom-only plan at $9.99/mo.?
Both Lightroom and Photoshop. That was the cost I signed up for, and it hasn't changed since. I don't use their cloud storage at all, so I don't mind being 'limited' to 1 TB.
 


Until seeing the TidBits statement that Aperture isn't a 32-bit app, I'd assumed that was the cause of death.

Just for curiosity and the sake of discussion, is anyone here a software coroner with knowledge of what other "technical reasons" will keep Aperture from running in macOS 10.15?
I have no first-hand knowledge myself but it's possible that even though Aperture itself is 64-bit, some of the plug-ins or other processes contained within may only be 32-bit.
 


In the context of this discussion, does anyone have comments on Luminar v3?
Just thinking out loud, does anything else in macOS use the RAW engine - so that Apple is likely to keep it around more than one more major rev? I'm seeing flashes of Apple dropping the RAW engine and then BOOM! end of the line. If we're learning anything the hard(er) way the last couple years, it's that we can't rely on Apple for anything beyond the base OS, and even that can be sketchy in areas.
Well, Apple Photos uses the Apple RAW engine, so I don't think it is likely to disappear.
 


I bought Capture One at the end of last year, and I really like it a lot (though I'm not totally up to speed with it, and the catalog/session models can be a bit confusing). It's expensive if you need support for Nikon and other cameras (as we did), but you get a license for three computers, and it's cheaper if a Fuji or Sony-specific version covers your needs.
Capture One is what I imagine Aperture might have become had it not been so precipitously thrown off the cliff in one of Apple's worst decisions of late. It provides stunning RAW capture edits, better than any other option. Yes, the interface is decidedly European in its approach, and the learning curve takes a bit of effort. The lynda.com tutorials are much easier to follow than most of what the company provides, and they're well worth the price. But once you experience the capability to do precise color edits and see the results, you'll never look back.

Also: you have choice of a permanent license or subscription. Note also that Adobe is rolling out a doubling of the Photo plan from $10 to $20/month. No doubt similar to follow with the full Creative Suite.
 


Given that almost five years have passed since the announcement, it is amazing that Aperture is still popular. It is now in the category of many OS X-based applications that may live on while running in virtual machines -- unless the graphics are a problem. Not ever being or supporting an Aperture user, I can't speak to that.
I still use Aperture as my image editor of choice. Even after 5 years it is still an extremely competent image editor, but more importantly, no one has a better, more flexible DAM [in my opinion]. I own Capture One Pro and have a subscription to Lightroom/Photoshop. Don't use either, just Photoshop, and with the recent price increase, I'll be dropping that. I love the editing prowess of Capture One Pro, but it has a very "European" interface with a steep learning curve, and its DAM is not anywhere near as flexible [in my opinion]. I suspect I'll be moving Aperture to a dedicated Mac and leaving it at Mojave. (sigh)
 



Amazon disclaimer:
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Latest posts