JoJu

Dein Skript hat 54 Zeilen. Ich hatte das 2. von BrightShadow kopiert, das kommt auf 105 Zeilen. AI Version hier ist 26.3.1 (bei CS habe ich die Nummern nicht mehr präsent, aber die aktuellste Version hat schon 27 davor. Dahin werde ich jetzt updaten)
Dein Skript funktioniert prima! Vielen Dank!

In AICS5:
Datei > Skripten > Anderes Skript > dein *.jsx wählen
Hat nicht funktioniert?
Vielleicht etwas nicht mitkopiert?
Versuche dies:
Artboard Name To Text.jsx
Wie gesagt, das Originalskript erstellt weissen Text. Kann man im Skript oder erst danach leicht ändern.

😁 I'd take it immediately! It was so good to use!

Aperture, for image management, is still (IMHO) king. There just isn't anything available that can do what it can do with ease and speed… and then there's the Light Table feature, which is still unique (within the world of photo editing/management apps) to Aperture.

Despite Aperture being killed off by Apple years ago, I still keep it running happily on a dedicated older Mac to maintain a massive library of edited/completed images. Whilst Capture One has taken over the batch image processing duties, its image management abilities are shockingly bad in comparison to Aperture.

Every time an image editing/management app has been released or got updated, the feeling of disappointment continues as all the developers seem to concentrate on nowadays are new features that might create headlines or outdo their competitors. Feels a bit like the car manufacturers game of chasing stupid horsepower or acceleration figures. I really wish someone, anyone (I no longer care if Serif/Affinity can/will do this or not, but great if they can/will), would come up with a proper image management alternative to Aperture that goes beyond just the basics.

Aperture was light years ahead of the competition when Apple decided to kill it / embed some of its functionality in photos. In many ways some of its more desirable features have still not been duplicated.
 
RIP Aperture

Yes, I full heartedly agree. Aperture is the scale others have to reach - none out there is as clear and well thought as Aperture was. That was the thing we're creating workarounds for - we can go different paths, but we only can hit a center spot with something like Aperture. I lost hope what i had for Affinity DAM - these guys can't do it. I see their RAW approach and I'm sorry to say - it's missed by that much.

The real thing for me JoJu, was Aperture.  Unfortunately it is still the best, even years after Apple, for some crazy reason, killed it off.  It’s hard to write software that good and Adobe have certainly not managed with Lr, although it is adequate for many people and everyone of course, must pick one of the tools that are available.  One day someone will write something as good as Aperture and I will switch with much relief ... but in the mean time, until the workarounds become worse than the alternatives, I’ll stick with them and Aperture.

I don't want to climb into the old discussion about closed libraries vs. open folder structures. And as you already pointed out, JasperD, who are we to make Affinity staff work?
 
For the people with the hang to their own holy folder structures, I understand the "advantage" of having a transparent structure and also the anxiety against a black box. I think, I made myself clear I don't want to get the Aperture functions into Affinity photo as it wouldn't improve speed. However, I don't feel Aperture the way of a black box - it takes care about all structures and helps me finding my pictures better than on the LAN drives in the office I'm working in. And there we use Bridge, which is absolutely horrible and diskspace consuming. Folder structures have the advantage of being stable and reliable. And the disadvantage there's nothing as inflexible to organize pictures in. So, for the folder structure guys there's an easy way not to bother with a database structured DAM: Just don't buy it.
 
Aperture took me a while to get used to after I bought it 5 years ago. I had to learn about what is what and what to do with it. There are lots of things which could be improved in Aperture - or, which could be done better with another start from scratch. I don't want necessarily a closed library, but I want a performing database, a fast browser and face detection. Keywords could be done better although I doubt I would love to sit hours for tagging pictures with keywords. I think there are better ways to categorize.
 
Affinity Photo already has a RAW converter which worked pretty well at some RAWs I tried. I'd find it pretty cool having a browser in which I can make easy edits in each organisation I'm in, be it "All photos", a project, an album, a smart album, a slide-show without starting an external module. And if I need more, I hand it over to Affinity photo. Also, I prefer non-destructive changes of my pictures. Affinity already separated Photo into 4 modules - normal editor, liquify, converter and exporter. There's also a media browser - most of Aperture is already there, most of the modules will become improved. I thought I like Aperture because it's one app for everything I normally do with my pictures. But I really like it because there are no seams between the different working regions.
 
Like billtils I do have huge libraries and I don't want to reorganize all of 'em. I'm not married to Aperture, it's just my best (known) way to organize my stuff. If I can transfer those structures to something else with no hassle and if this "something else" is as easy to use (meaning, no long days in front of YouTube tutorials), I'm in.

The app is "fab", at least in most parts - and if they change the UI colour to be set lighter, the even better.
 
What Affinity is not doing "fab", not even remotely: Creating an excellent RAW-file manager. I mean, I still use Aperture if not daily, then weekly. ALTHOUGH it's dead end, ALTHOUGH I will not get updates, ALTHOUGH I invested some dosh in Capture One (not Media Pro, though, as I hate their UI), in OnOne, PhotoLine, Lyn, PhotoMechanic (only trial), Photo Supreme, Picktorial, GraphicConverter (because of it's library module), DxO (as trial), Pixelmator and Affinity. So many apps, none as convincing, reliable, easy to use and robust like Aperture - it's a shame to all these apps!

Sweet! So then there shouldn't be a problem with Serif delivering that DAM software soon. Their announcement to PetaPixel was only a month or so ago. So I guess we have around 6 more months to go until we hear some news about a beta program?

I suppose for the same amount of human resources, you will be diverting your efforts away from research/development of additional features and improvements on the Mac platform because those bodies will be committing time on developing and ironing out whatever kinks there will be on the Windows platform.
Personally, i think it's a good move if we want to see Serif surviving. From what I've seen, besides some minor issues, Affinity Photo is already "quite good". At least for what I need, and especially for the price it asks for. Every Mac user will only typically buy it once. Spending more effort "enhancing" this software is dead money to Serif, unless said enhancement is proven to turn more Mac users towards AP.
The alternative will be Serif running very lean, possibly not even surviving, and we'll lose support for their software entirely. Which will suck, given how often Mac OS changes.
Also, my newest Mac is my Macbook Pro, early 2011 model. It's likely to be my last, because I simply do not agree with Apple's attitude and direction (both hardware and software). Everything is trending towards a more "consumer" and over-simplified feel. Your new Mac Pro looks like a toy, they took away Aperture, no more CD/DVD drives even on desktops...
It's become a numbers game since the death of Steve Jobs. It's no longer about developing nice products, but about culling "low performers" in favor of what is profitable (which is, the general consumer market). What's next on their cull list? Probably Logic as I'd imagine Final Cut Pro will stick around for a bit longer.
After all this, all I'm trying to say is, as much as I hate Windows equally (especially Windows 10), I might (quite unfortunately) be joining the Windows platform very soon. And it'd be nice if Affinity is there to provide some level of familiarity.
 
 

I agree.  It's one of the reasons why I stay away from photography forums now-a-days because there's too much whining.
Meanwhile on art forums... Hey, look at this picture the Sistine Chapel that I done using nothing but a Bic ballpoint pen.

Noted, but I don't actually have LR, I'm just pointing to LR as an example. I'm not planning on buying LR either as Adobe is not getting a cent of my money after they have decided on forcing people to pay a subscription.
Ditto :-)

I'm afraid I agree 100%.
 
The honeymoon period with Affinity is probably over.  The contagious enthusiasm and excitement in the early stages, was fantastic and such a breath of fresh air compared with Adobe.  However, the money is hard to refuse and entirely understandable.  Also of course, Serif is a Windows software company.  It was the Mac software thing that was 'out on a limb'.   I'm all for the iPad version, but with the launch of the Windows vs, even though Serif say it's a separate team etc., the astonishing pace of progress has pretty much ground to a halt.
 
I'm hoping that the ex lead-engineer on Aperture, who has released the very excellent 'Raw Power' raw processing software, which is  closely based around Aperture, will find the resources to move onto a DAM as well.  I think it is tentatively in their sights ... and so it should be, because there is definitely a great market for the Mac, especially as you point out the advantages of the Mac having great raw processing and colour management built-in.

I couldn't agree more and in fact, it was one of my disappointments with Serif and Affinity.  They've copied Adobe's UI and to be honest it is and always has been, crap.  Copying it was a missed opportunity. They could have done something fab instead.  Of course, I understand perfectly why they did copy it.  I wish though, that they'd *at the very least* changed the totally dumb system of using colour to paint masks in/out. 
 
As for Apple dumping Aperture.  It is still stunning to me, that Apple could treat a group of professionals in such a way.  Thousands of hours of work, per pro, summarily dumped in the dumpster without so much as an explanation.  Shocking.  I'll never ever ever trust Apple with a pro app again.

GFS, thank you for agreeing. I had contact with the Aperture developer and maybe I'm wrong but I sensed a lot of frustration that Apple abandoned - without a real reason (they are literally bathing in money...).
 
Possibly I'm only stubborn, but so far I've still some spirit of getting happy about awesomeness - if I can recognize it.

Windows doesn't include RAW-processing, therefore Affinity programmers must take care of another task.
A lot of Windows versions don't include color management - I'm not sure, if Affinity needs the newest (CM-supporting) version Win 10?
Some capabilities have to be dedicated to the whole mess of drivers, especially for graphic cards.
I agree that more users mean more incoming sales and therefore more human resources - but these are needed because Windows users need to address more support.
Within Mac OS, there are intelligent folders usable for all apps, Automator scripts and a lot more comfort functions, Developing these for Windows... I see the results in Adobe Bridge, in CaptureOne (I'm working with Windows on a daily basis) - these poor copies of OS X functions and their usage just suck.
 
Affinity will need some manpower to bring Affinity Photo in Windows to the same level as the ease of use in OS X - this kind of manpower is missing for a development of a "Aperture successor". I tried a lot of photo-organizing apps. Aperture, two years after death, still sets a benchmark. I was hoping very much Affinity could create something cool, instead they took the money road.

I think tablets are a dead end and would apprexiate the Affinity team not wasting any more time on it. Touch interfaces have (for now) the wow-factor for the masses, but I think most real pro's eyes are just glazing over by now. I "get" that you are supposed to work with lo-res proxy files, but that inevitably leads to a lot of potential syncing issues and preview rendering time I'd rather not deal with (been there). Not to mention how a touch interface slows you down and inevitably leads to ergonomic nightmare when working long hours compared to touch-typing shortcuts on a keyboard, and using a Wacom pen in combination with a dedicated controller like the Countor ShuttlePro v2, that can be programmed with all the macros you need/want in the palm of your hand, with physical keys and wheels that you can feel with your fingers without having to look at them, without taking your eyes away from the screen (ok, someone will correct me here and tell me that you don't have to take your eyes away from the screen when the input device IS the screen, but that leads back to the ergonomical nightmare part again, when you have to wave your hands over a large surface all day your shoulders and neck will start to hurt after a while). As "cool" as the IPad Pro/Surface may seem, there's of course also issues related to colour management and calibration. I get it, real pro's are in the minority, the majority of paying customers are amateurs or semi-pro, but I get kind of sick every time I see "pro" features announced that have everything to do with coolness and wow-factor and very little to do with actual pro usage. Like Apple's MacBook Pro announcement days ago, where they showcased the MBP with two 5K dispalys and two RAIDs and promoting it as a pro workstation. I tried that once before, and the fans on my MBP died. I don't think their cooling technology have improved that much in the couple of years passed. Most seasoned pros rightfully stick to the tested and true KISS principle. Which means hard keys and dials and beefy desktop workstations and calibrated displays.

To put it simply, Adobe forces our hand into a lifetime subscription model. In the old traditional model, most users used to skip a version or two because the new features usually did not justify upgrading just for one release. With a subscription model, you do pay as if you would upgrade anytime a new version is released…  in other word, there is no more skipping anymore. you pay all the time.
 
In a traditional model, each release needs to have enough new features to entice clients to upgrade. In a subscription model, innovation is not needed, you just need to keep up… or give the illusion that you do.
 
We're still using the full CS6 graphic at the office and once in a while, I look at what's new in CC, to see what I'm missing out and frankly it's not that much of an upgrade : Although CS6 is ancient, Adobe had not improved their software all that much in all those years. So if CC was a stand alone we would probably not upgrade anyway. There just isn't enough new stuff that's actually a time saver. Maybe in hope to have less buggy software, but according to the comment above, that is not the case. I might right, or not, regarding the above, but the point that with a subscription model the choice of upgrading, or not, has been striped from the client. You keep paying no matter what.
 
At any rate, Adobe software is built on a 20 years old + technology and is trapped in an old Software architecture with no real reason to start recoding from the bottom up; why would day, clients are now stuck with them no matter what. Well... unless there is a viable alternative. 
 
So I'm closely following up what's new with Affinity and hope that it is that complete viable alternative many are waiting for. A proper DAM would be another piece of that puzzle as I would prefer to stick with a suite of software design to work as one instead of peaces from everywhere.

Indeed!
 
And we hope that Serif take their inspiration from Aperture AND NOT from Lightroom.
 
Aperture still a wonderful UI and such a shame that Apple have moved away from pros ... but it's another opportunity for Serif.

well I´ve got 9 pro and had to just sign up but after reading the changelog of 10 and seeing that they left out many peaces I already knew it was not done with much care so I did not even install the dmg. There was only one interesting part which is sharpening in 3 stages.
- sharpening after capture
- creative sharpening 
- output sharpening
(or something similar to that)
 
that makes some sense to me or at least sounds like an interesting approach
 
I love the session concept of C1 but I just can´t see me using it for actually managing a big collection of sessions/ a big catalog on multiple computers. Really hope Affinity has that option.
 
On1 is just a fancy browser with few editing tools for 100€ but I´ve got C1p for 50€ as a Sony user so....
 
btw the YouTube video from PhaseOne concerning the C1 beta program had under 1000 views so that shows something.

I am also very keen to see an Affinity DAM.
 
I have used Aperture since its introduction and have tried Lr 3 times, most recently this last couple of months.  As a DAM, it is not as fine a piece of software as Aperture *was*.  So I'm hobbling along with a Mac on an old OS until something better comes along.
 
I was hoping this new alternative would be Affinity DAM this year, but it would seem this is not going to happen.  Windows appears to have stolen its wind!!  (BUT watch out Affinity, because you're massive current success has come thanks to a total dedication to a single platform and a unique opportunity.  Diluting your efforts is a dangerous game.)
 
Anyway ... the word, or explanation you're all hunting for, to describe what Photoshop and AF-Photo do ... but Lr, C1, Aperture etc. do not do, is 'compositing'.  Us old timers used to use the word all the time. You can't 'composite' with Lr or C1 or Aperture.

I did a couple of searches before posting this topic. If I missed the already given answer, I'd appreciate a link to that topic.
 
I'm still using Aperture and whenever I tried other RAW converters (except Lightroom, but I still like to keep my private Mac Adobe-free), I always missed a well thought workflow like the one i'm used to have in Aperture. But since Apple abandoned it and the new photos.app is close to useless for my intentions, I am looking into all other possible solutions. Like PhotoMechanic or PhotoSupreme, but I would prefer, how to say, just a better Aperture.
 
All included: Development, Management, keywords, faces, places, plus lens correction and a real fine Editor like AP is. Now I'm just wondering: Have you guys any plans to create a DAM in Affinity style? Speaking for me, I'm willing to pay as much as I used to pay for Aperture on dvd or PhaseOne, I'm just not willing to get another "only RAW converting" piece of software. And you guys did a really awesome job in such a short time of development! Keeps me thinking, if anybody gets it done, it's Affinity Serif. 

Aperture Library is in no way a black box, if you like folders. You can easily look into the folder structure, but you're not meant to mix shuffling pics in those folders and then go back using Aperture as a picture database manager. Aperture also can manage your photos in normal, easily accessible structures, but most people will mess up that so every database will have to break because things were moved manually.
 
My main point was about managing versions of RAW files. Differently developed versions, all neatly hold together in stacks, along with my final edits as PSD files. I would love to see that in AP. But to have a decent workflow, I would want to keep the raw files organized, have AP develop the RAWs, let me keep various versions of a photo (RAW, RAW development version A,B,C... and externally edited PSDs and TIFFs. I can do that manually. But then, I can also still code in assembler and write webages with a texteditor. It's just no longer the most efficient and powerful way. ;-)
 
Thanks for the hint about aphub. I'll have a look, Pete. Since Apple decided to kill Aperture and Photos will probably never be something similar in terms of serious version management etc., I'd love to see someone else as capable as the AP team to find clever ways to address the issues - through integration of AP in other management solutions or to provide nondestructive editing and version management along with some ways to organize pictures.

I would assume that all will agree that they prefer the development team to concentrate on improving the already existing functions and on creating new ones that users are requesting, but with my beloved Aperture's inevitable and imminent demise I would be over the moon were Serif/Affinity to present us with a stand-alone DAM at some point in the (near) future to replace it.  I have been using Aperture only 2 1/2 years but I do not want to go over to the new Photos App if El Capitan nails down the lid on Aperture's coffin.