Lumière d’Argent

OK, I have resolved that Aperture is after all the best compromise today as a foundation of my software toolbox. It takes care of storage, backup, editing, sorting, searching, cataloguing and RAW conversion so well it is enough to justify it already.

I still need PhotoShop, but I realize I use it as a stop gap until Aperture gets what is missing like local adjustments, a more developed print module where I could put arbitrary text on the print, and something usable for spotting. Seriously, that’s all I use PhotoShop for. And maybe when I get the Mac Pro spotting will turn out to be usable in Aperture too.

LightZone is great, but, as said before, using two external editors with Aperture is a mess and better avoided. So I’ll stop using it.

Given my PhotoShop usage, I seldom see the point of upgrading to CS3. CS3 will be faster on my Intel Mac but CS is already faster than on my previous 1 Ghz G4 and I never found it too slow. On the Mac Pro I’ll have all the speed I can dream of.

So Aperture and my ancient PhotoShop do it all for me, greatly reducing the software needs.

I wonder if many other photographers out there arrive at the same conclusions and what impact this could have on the photography software market.

Stephane :: Apr.09.2007 :: Software :: No Comments »

I am not about to engage in a rant about how Adobe products are too expensive. I don’t think they are. They are high quality products sold at a fair price.

In the US.

Upgrading to CS3 Design Standard is $399 in the US.

It is 685€ in Europe (without VTA).

That’s $913 at today’s rate.

That’s a 129% markup.

That’s 2.3 times the price.

The prices are on the Apple Store, on the web, so considerations about cost of doing business are largely irrelevant.

I don’t think Adobe sells at a loss in the US.

So, this is plain rip off. Unless I can buy in the US or at US prices, I won’t buy. Plain and simple.

Stephane :: Mar.29.2007 :: Software :: No Comments »

LightZone continues to evolve. The last release can be called mature in my opinion. The last release puts emphasis on integration with Aperture, iPhoto and LightRoom. This is a very good idea because LightZone offers most of what the programs lack, namely selective editing. It still lacks a few things to be a real PhotoShop replacement, however.

Actually, it really lacks three things for me:

1. Ability to scale the actual file and save it with the new dimension. This is useful for fine printing. It allows to apply the precise amount of sharpening for the print size. This might be a mute point also because prints from Lightzone seem to be quite good.

2. Extensible canvas and text tool to allow to prepare printing files with captions. I don’t know if this should be in Aperture or LightZone but if it was added to LightZone it would be consistent with the previous point.

3. Healing brush. That one is so hard to replace!

This could look like nitpicking. However, I think it is important to be able to fully replace PhotoShop, especially in the context of Aperture and LightRoom integration. With both products, having two external editors creates a mess of versions, not to mention the cumbersome procedure to switch from one another. Lightcrafts has brought LightZone price to a point where price is not a factor anymore. I have tried the last release on a number of shots now and it is really good. Really really good, especially for B&W. I think I’ll finally buy it!

Go on, Lightcrafts, you have come a long way.

Stephane :: Mar.26.2007 :: Software :: No Comments »

I should say in CoreImage, but people with the same problem get the idea.

The reason I had trouble was that I was missing the Digital Camera RAW Support Update 1.0.1 (Universal). On Intel-based Mac’s, it corrects a bug in DNG handling. So there.

After installing it, I had to correct the Raw.plist file. Previously I changed the DSC-V3 into DSC-R1 and it kind of worked. I say ‘kind of’ because the colour balance was really off. This time I tried by replacing DSLR-A100 with DSC-R1. Bingo! It works well now, with good colours.

Stephane :: Mar.05.2007 :: Software :: No Comments »

I’ll keep Aperture. It is slow with adjustments and the limited RAW support still worries me, but I think it is still a better design than LightRoom. Those two problems can be fixed with time.

LightRoom biggest problems are its modality and weaker cataloguing system. Its modality cannot be fixed without redoing the program completely. Its library system has itself an annoying modality: you work either in folder or in catalogue mode. In folder mode you can use stacks. In catalogue mode you can’t. This is bad. That last point can be corrected but really it is bad design.

Plus, I finally found out the origin of the problem with the hack to get Aperture to work DSC-R1 files and fixed that. I’ll probably get a faster machine in the next months.

Case closed for me.

For now.

Stephane :: Mar.04.2007 :: Software :: No Comments »