Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by GFS

  1. Competing MF cameras. Aside from that though, it's not anywhere near the DAM that Aperture is/was. Nice RAW conversion though.
  2. Once again Aperture has this covered. You can choose to have files either 'managed' in the library, or 'referenced' somewhere else, e.g. a networked drive. The really cool bit is that it is really easy, using Aperture, to *move* files around. For example, using Aperture, you can move them from one drive to another, or if you want, you can change them to 'managed' so that they reside inside Aperture, which is handy if you need some files when you are away from your studio/workstation. Upon return, you can just as easily move them back to where they were. Aperture recognises instantly when a drive with referenced files becomes available and I would expect it to work with Mountain Duck. Apple really got Aperture right ... what they got wrong, was dumping it, but on a positive note, they provided what is hopefully great inspiration for Serif to make as good a DAM.
  3. Well, of course Aperture easily answers these requirements. Apart from plenty of tagging tools, you can setup basic and expanded view parameters for list view, grid view and the viewer window and toggle between them with a key press. Sorting is a simple as clicking the column header and smart albums can use all this stuff. You can even add custom fields to your hearts content as well. Here's what you can choose from
  4. I 'need' it, because Lr isn't what I want and Aperture is slowly being left behind. CaptureOne doesn't have full raw support. (What I really need, is for Serif to re-create Aperture).
  5. It's all true though. I even have a Newton 2000 in a cupboard somewhere to prove it.
  6. You don't necessarily have to get the data in and out. I work with a > 20 year old software which can apply its edits to any file. Any file. So for example, you could work on a tiny jpeg on the iPad and syncing via cloud, have those same edits applied to a full sized file somewhere else. I'm sure that AFP will have something along those lines. They have also talked of feature parity with the desktop version. As to whether or not Apple can be trusted for pros going forward, sadly I have to agree with you. As an Aperture user, I very much doubt that I would *ever* trust Apple for pro application use again. The cavalier way that one of the most wealthy companies in the world 'dumped' us, was unbelievable. The downside of the Surface, is Windows. Nothing they currently say can make that any better.
  7. Essential!!! Can't believe that you asked for this over 2 years ago. I'm asking too.
  8. 2014!!! Hmmmph. It's standard Mac UI behaviour, with no doubt every hook they need readily available. It's a feature I use constantly and I've no doubt many of us do, who work with multiple drives/Macs etc. Completely brilliant to be able to move the file from the Titlebar, without even leaving the app.
  9. For a very long time on the Mac it has been possible to click on the document name in the Title bar and see the path to where the document resides. Since Mavericks, it has also been possible to relocate the document via this menu. It would be *very* nice if this simple Mac feature was implemented into the AF apps.
  10. I'd like to add my voice to this feature request. Very surprised to find it not available.
  11. No, that's not what I meant. The guy's top level ... Senior Engineer for Aperture. Does it get better? He's left Apple and decided to carry on with that work. Aperture is an absolutely superb piece of software in the view of many people, myself included. I tried Lr three times since it was launched, but always found it lacking by comparison, particularly as a DAM, as have many others, notably lots on here. Also the UI, Aperture is superb and Lr is ... well uggghh. Adobe have never ever made the slightest effort in UI. So what's interesting for us photographers, is that this guy is working away to produce a solution. First step, a really very nice looking raw convertor, with some excellent features. v1.5 will doubtless add missing features. v2? from his comment ... maybe a DAM and that would be excellent, because as Aperture's Senior Engineer, he's likely to produce a pretty damned good DAM. :)
  12. So things just got a whole lot more interesting for Aperture users. Aperture's lead engineer has just launched a RAW processor, which is very very cool for a v1 product. It is based closely around Aperture's tool set and it isn't DAM (yet) but a shy hint that a DAM would be a 'cool thing' suggests he may have that in mind for the future. The RAW processor is either an extension for Apple's Photos app, or runs standalone. Launch price promotion of just $10. Seems like it's worth it just to encourage him to keep going. The RAW processing looks really excellent, as we might expect from someone of this calibre. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSpHIT0ok_Q http://gentlemencoders.com
  13. Sorry MBd, talking at cross purposes. I'm simply saying that technically, there is no reason why AFPhoto cannot do this. However, in its current state, as you say, it can not. Who knows, perhaps Serif will move forwards towards the past and make AFPhoto more of a vector app. Would be nice ... especially for the speed.
  14. You can actually ... it depends on how you go to the final image. AFPhoto mixes pixel and vector, so you could apply a pixel width to a vector shape, which AFPhoto could 'interpret' for the screen preview and then rasterise to an actual pixel width when you decide to actually use your file, e.g. print, build to tiff, send a jpeg etc. etc. (alternatively known as flattening). I know this can be done, because I've been working like this in a 100% vector photo app since 1997. (If only AFPhoto had the speed of that app, I'd be happy enough).
  15. There is one aspect of using blur to soften the edges that's not so good and that is that it blurs them. Having a pixel width to the mask would make the mask's edge increasingly transparent toward the outer edge, but not blur it. So the image is still sharp, but the mask is soft edged. So I guess there's no way to achieve this in AFPhoto?
  16. Thought of something else! Is there a way to apply the fx blur as a gradient?
  17. Doubtless simple ... but I can't find how to do it. I'm using the Pen tool in AFPhoto to make a shape, which I want to use as a mask for a pixel layer. I also want to use it as a mask for a fill/paint layer. How do I alter the width of the mask/shape edge? It is by default razor sharp. I would like it to be somewhere between 4 and 20 pixels (not sure yet) ... so that the edge is soft. How do I achieve this?
  18. I think that if Serif make a DAM, then they will do so with the hope of selling as many copies as possible. The only way they can achieve this goal, is to completely and reliably take care of the migration. The task is too daunting for most individual users to consider. Adobe, in a fairly typical Adobe way, half did this for Aperture to Lr. They do the easy stuff for you (text) but made no effort to carry adjustments over. Since Aperture's adjustments are all text-based and brushes are simply alpha masks, it may have required some investment in programming, but as ever, Adobe only look at the bottom line. So I hope very much that Serif will invest in making a smooth transition simple. How incredible would it be, to simply import your Aperture libraries into AF-DAM and boom! Everything is there. (Sounds like the sort of thing Jobs would have liked to do right.)
  19. Uploaded as GFS.zip File should have a black background. Only way I can find to see it is turning OFF Composite Red, Green and Blue and leaving Composite Alpha turned on.
  20. I've tried this a few times, but cannot make it work so that the background is visible. The new masks (on the layer) just mask everything totally. If I subsequently clear the Background Apha, so that there is no alpha at all (so that the entire image should be visible) it just clears the entire image. The only way I can get to see the background is by toggling the Composite Alpha channel. Nothing else works.
  21. Hi MEB, I just tried in the beta and I'm getting the same thing. I can see my background if I Invert the Background Alpha, but then the part that I want to see is masked and I just see the transparency. I can't find any way of being able to toggle the alpha's visibility so that I can either see my image with the alpha or without it as I would in PS.
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note there is currently a delay in replying to some post. See pinned thread in the Questions forum. These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.