Image management software.

[Jerome Marot]

I will need to replace my present image management software within a year or so. I am still using Apple Aperture, but that software will not work if I buy a new mac.

The obvious candidate would be Adobe Lightroom, but I am not impressed by Adobe's revenue model. I am looking for an alternative.

I tried "Photos" (Apple replacement for Aperture), but it misses several functions I liked to use (list below). I also tried Dark Table (free software) and it does not suit my needs either. I heard about Luminar 4, but I have not tried it.

The functions I miss:

• ability to correct a first image (e.g. colour temperature) and copy the correction to a selection of other pictures
• ability to send a picture to an external editor
• ability to do local edits (e.g. remove an annoying sensor dust) and copy the correction to a selection of other pictures
• ability to send a selection of pictures to a "light table" so as to see whether they fit together

Additionally, the software should be able to do

• distortion correction, ideally taking account of focal length (for zooms)
• perspective correction (e.g. when a building is photographed up, "Photos" can do that)
• disable all "cloud" storage functions, I don't want to store my pictures online.

Is there a software you can recommend? What do you use yourself?

 

[Asher Kelman]

I use Capture One and PS CC

I have but never use Lightroom.

For cataloguing I use iviewmedia pro now called Media Pro from Phase One but discontinued but still works At least to 10.3.9

It has it has editing functions that I never use but I will check for copying edits to other images. I do that in PS CC or Capture One

Making images rectilinear I do in PS RAW editor or in DXO app I got for free and could try to send you.

Asher

 

[Jerome Marot]

For cataloguing I use iviewmedia pro now called Media Pro from Phase One but discontinued but still works At least to 10.3.9

So you also use discontinued software.

Making images rectilinear I do in PS RAW editor or in DXO app I got for free and could try to send you.

Thank you for the offer, but I have a free copy of DXO and I never was impressed by that software.

 

[nicolas claris]

So you also use discontinued software.

I don't think that Asher comp' is updated to Catalina…
I confirm that Iview media pro does not run with the last OSX, iti is not 16 bits

I use LR classic (together with PS) not that expensive and imho unbeatable!

 

[Asher Kelman]

Well, I may have to Fire up Lightroom which is sitting unused. Which is best, Classic of CC?

Asher

 

[Asher Kelman]

So you also use discontinued software.

It is solid as a rock! Damn pity tgat Phasr One has retired it. Capture one has DAM too but I have never used it. Is it similar to LR?

Thank you for the offer, but I have a free copy of DXO and I never was impressed by that software.

I admit is nowhere as versatile as using Photoshop CC. I imagine LR has the same engine for those corrections in Adobe Camera RAW.


we must hear from Robert Watcher about Affinity.

 

[Robert Watcher]

unfortunately there is nothing that does what Lightroom does. I am not fond of the revenue model either as Anne and I live on a very low monthly income that excludes monthly fees other than our living expenses in the third world countries we stay in.

Since 2007 when I purchased my first MacBook (I also had it on my Windows workstation at the time) I have been using Lightroom for all of my Cataloguing and a majority of processing of files for my client work, travel photography and personal photography. Currently I have maybe 25TB of files on external drives that are organized and managed with Lightroom.

The last paid up front version I had was Lightroom 5 when Adobe was offering a discount - released not much before Adobe discontinued paid apps and went to subscription. It has been current enough to handle all of my needs right up until recently - even Catalina. I have looked everywhere to find a substitute that suits my needs and wirkflow, and there is not one in my view.

Why I now have made the decision to opt into the subscription payment, is not so much because of Lightroom (paid, handles files from my used cameras, works on current OS) - but because of a choice I felt the need to make because my version of PS (as well as FCP) became disabled when I upgraded my Macbook to Mojave and of course is the same now I have Catalina. I used Photoshop quite regularly for graphics and compositing, and have considered and purchased a few alternatives. None are as effortless to me as using Photoshop - and none can provide my organizing so that I can update and replace the PS/Lightroom combo.

I decided to give In when we came home in March this year. I hate that I have to put together $196.00 CAD for the year and every year after - but I love having Photoshop again and benefit from the newer features in current Lightroom version.

 

[Robert Watcher]

Well, I may have to Fire up Lightroom which is sitting unused. Which is best, Classic of CC?

Asher

I use Lightroom Classic. It is comfortable to me and fully featured compared to Lightroom CC. As well I don’t use the Adobe Cloud for storing.

 

[Robert Watcher]

It is solid as a rock! Damn pity tgat Phasr One has retired it. Capture one has DAM too but I have never used it. Is it similar to LR?




I admit is nowhere as versatile as using Photoshop CC. I imagine LR has the same engine for those corrections in Adobe Camera RAW.


we must hear from Robert Watcher about Affinity.

Yes I have Affinity photo both on my MacBook and my iPad. It’s a wonderful fast inexpensive software, but is of no use for organizing, cataloguing and quick processing of images. Over the last couple of years I haven’t been doing near as much work with Affinity as I had hoped. I’ve played with it and like a couple of the features. I’m not comfortable with it though and have not been interested in putting the time and effort into a new learning curve —- so it is seldom opened.

 

[Jerome Marot]

Maybe I explain what my problem is.

With Catalina (the latest version of OS X), 32-bits applications are not supported any more. Photoshop CS6 (the last version without a subscription) uses some 32-bits library and will not work. Same goes for Illustrator, which I also use. Same goes for Apple Aperture (although there is a way to patch the libraries called Retroactive).

CS6 (Photoshop, Illustrator, etc...) is 8 years old. Aperture was discontinued 6 years ago. I think it is reasonable to replace that software eventually. So I am studying what the market offers.

I use LR classic (together with PS) not that expensive and imho unbeatable!

I used to upgrade Photoshop every second year. Lightroom cheapest option is 285€ for 2 years or 571€ with Photoshop and 1 TB of storage. I think I paid less at the time for CS6 (Photoshop, Illustrator and Indesign).
7 years ago, Adobe figured out that they could use their market dominance to force everyone to the subscription model and that indeed increased their revenue considerably. Now they are nudging everybody to their cloud service. How long do you think it will take till they tell everyone "Glad that you put all your pictures on our servers. If you want to still access them, the new subscription price is the following..."?

 

[Jerome Marot]

unfortunately there is nothing that does what Lightroom does.

But I don't need all what Lightroom does. Neither do I need all what photoshop does.

Besides, there is a problem with market dominance. Photoshop users point out all what photoshop does, but they don't know all what Photoshop does not do (colour correction, for example). When people judge competing software by looking for everything they know from PS (or LR, etc...) and the competing software does not have, they forget about all the features the other software may have, which do not exist in the software they are used to.

 

[Robert Watcher]

But I don't need all what Lightroom does. Neither do I need all what photoshop does.

Besides, there is a problem with market dominance. Photoshop users point out all what photoshop does, but they don't know all what Photoshop does not do (colour correction, for example). When people judge competing software by looking for everything they know from PS (or LR, etc...) and the competing software does not have, they forget about all the features the other software may have, which do not exist in the software they are used to.

yeah - I’m not comparing all the features of any one product to all the features of another. I’m interested if it can replace my needs as closely as possible. The only software I have considered for organizing my large collection of photos - is Photo Mechanic. Apparently very fast for displaying images. Was designed for speed with photojournalists in mind. But it doesn’t provide for all of my use case from a single application, and so cannot replace Lightroom for me.

If I didn’t have the need right now for Photoshop with the amount of graphics and design work that I am doing, I would still be sticking with Lightroom 5. It still works and does everything I need. Nothing else that I checked into organizes, provides search abilities and stores in catalogues the way Lightroom does - even though they claim to replace it. Plus they still all cost money and one or two popular names are also adopting the subscription model. So I guess, it’s not just Adobe. What is stopping any one of them to change their model and pricing in the future or leave us high and dry by discontinuing the application (example Aperture).

I desperately wished there was something out there that suited my cataloguing and quick processing needs even 80 or 90%. I appreciate that everyone workflow and needs and expectations are different. Have you considered or tried Photomechanic for organizing?

 

[Asher Kelman]

So how is it advantageous to a upgrade to a 64 bit operating system in a Mac right now?

Asher

 

[Robert Watcher]

Generally speaking if you purchased a new Mac in 2007 or later, its processor is 64-bit. I have a 2013 MacBook Air (basic model) and it handles Catalina fine. The last paid versions of Lightroom 5 and 6 work just fine on Catalina (and Mojave) from my experience. I don’t know about older versions. It’s PS that gets disabled and becomes unusable.

So if you want to make use of older software and continue to be able to use older versions if PS - it isn’t advisable to upgrade to Mojave or Catalina. I think you could get away with creating a separate hard drive with your old operating system and apps and boot from that, if you wanted to go through the effort. And then put the new OS and updated apps on your computer hard drive.


——-
I did just find this work around for PS CS6 with Catalina - https://discussions.apple.com/thread/251055813

 

[Jerome Marot]

So how is it advantageous to a upgrade to a 64 bit operating system in a Mac right now?

You are already using a 64 bits operating system. OS X is 64 bits since it was ported to Intel processors (remember Power PCs?) in 2006 and requires a 64 bits processor since 10.8 (Mountain Lion, 2012).

Your question is therefore 2 questions: why should we upgrade and why did Apple stop 32 bits support?

The answer, as uncomfortable as it may be, is that you must upgrade to get continued support (as in getting security patches or being able to use a new computer) and Apple dropped 32 bits support to save money on maintenance of old libraries.

 

[Jerome Marot]

Plus they still all cost money and one or two popular names are also adopting the subscription model. So I guess, it’s not just Adobe. What is stopping any one of them to change their model and pricing in the future or leave us high and dry by discontinuing the application (example Aperture).

Nothing, and I know it from experience. I have been stranded by Serif (the makers of Affinity) with Page Plus and I have been stranded by Corel, when they stopped coding for the mac platform (they are back). But I would prefer to vote with my wallet against such practices, when possible.

Have you considered or tried Photomechanic for organizing?

No, I haven't. I did not know about that software. Does it answer the following requirements:

• ability to correct a first image (e.g. colour temperature) and copy the correction to a selection of other pictures
• ability to send a picture to an external editor
• ability to do local edits (e.g. remove an annoying sensor dust) and copy the correction to a selection of other pictures
• ability to send a selection of pictures to a "light table" so as to see whether they fit together?

 

[Robert Watcher]

Nothing, and I know it from experience. I have been stranded by Serif (the makers of Affinity) with Page Plus and I have been stranded by Corel, when they stopped coding for the mac platform (they are back). But I would prefer to vote with my wallet against such practices, when possible.




No, I haven't. I did not know about that software. Does it answer the following requirements:

• ability to correct a first image (e.g. colour temperature) and copy the correction to a selection of other pictures
• ability to send a picture to an external editor
• ability to do local edits (e.g. remove an annoying sensor dust) and copy the correction to a selection of other pictures
• ability to send a selection of pictures to a "light table" so as to see whether they fit together?

no I don’t believe so. it’s a highly capable media organizer only. Needs similar to yours is a reason I rejected considering it. https://home.camerabits.com/

 

[nicolas claris]

I used to upgrade Photoshop every second year. Lightroom cheapest option is 285€ for 2 years or 571€ with Photoshop and 1 TB of storage. I think I paid less at the time for CS6 (Photoshop, Illustrator and Indesign).
7 years ago, Adobe figured out that they could use their market dominance to force everyone to the subscription model and that indeed increased their revenue considerably. Now they are nudging everybody to their cloud service. How long do you think it will take till they tell everyone "Glad that you put all your pictures on our servers. If you want to still access them, the new subscription price is the following..."?

Jerome,
I use LR and PS for all my jobs (commercial and personal) the price I pay is fair enough for the service I get using Adobe's SWs.
I don't use any octet with their cloud. I've my own cloud, thanks to the fiber connection…
However every shots are stored on 2 different ecternal HD (with one copy in a safe at the bank)

 

[nicolas claris]

So if you want to make use of older software and continue to be able to use older versions if PS - it isn’t advisable to upgrade to Mojave or Catalina. I think you could get away with creating a separate hard drive with your old operating system and apps and boot from that, if you wanted to go through the effort. And then put the new OS and updated apps on your computer hard drive.
——-
I did just find this work around for PS CS6 with Catalina - https://discussions.apple.com/thread/251055813

I ran CS6 and other 32 bits sw without any problem under Mojave…

 

[Robert Watcher]

I ran CS6 and other 32 bits sw without any problem under Mojave…

Ah yes - you are correct Nicolas. I do remember having to change a setting to get PS to work the way I wanted. Just searched for old article on OPF, and found what the issue was:

https://openphotographyforums.com/forums/threads/photoshop-cs5-cs6-on-mojave.22556/


Anyway - for sure Photoshop was grayed out when I updated to Catalina a few months ago. That is what ultimately prompted me to pay up for the subscription.

 

[Jerome Marot]

On yesterday's WWDC, Apple announced they are transitioning their computers to new processors. Apple said that it expects its first Mac with custom silicon to launch by the end of 2020, and it expects to transition its entire lineup within the next two years.

(Edit: what this mean is that all software I presently use on a mac will need to be updated within 2-3 years. It may also mean that some smaller developers may simply abandon the mac platform, like Corel did at the time of the PowerPC-Intel transition. Not Adobe Photoshop, of course and probably not Affinity as they already have a twin product for iOS).

 

[Jerome Marot]

There is apparently a plugin to make Photos behave more like Aperture: https://gentlemencoders.com/raw-power-for-macos/

I like the approach because, even if the plugin dies, I still keep the database in Photos which is likely to be maintained for a while. Also: the plugin is available for iOS.

Did anybody try that?

 

[Asher Kelman]

I’m very impressed!

I’ll give it a whirl!

Asher

 

[Jerome Marot]

I'll try it, but I need to update the OS to Mojave first. I may first try it on iOS.

 

[Jerome Marot]

Finally, I tried "Raw Power" for the iPad. It can do the following:

• distortion correction, or so it seems (it is automatic and hidden from the end user)
• perspective correction (e.g. when a building is photographed up, "Photos" can do that)
• disable all "cloud" storage functions
• ability to correct a first image (e.g. colour temperature) and copy the correction to another picture (I still need to figure that one out)
• ability to send a picture to an external editor (I still need to figure out the limits of that, as it uses the iPad built-in "share" function and what is shared depends on whether the picture was edited or not)

The functions I miss:

• ability to do local edits (e.g. remove an annoying sensor dust) and copy the correction to a selection of other pictures
• ability to send a selection of pictures to a "light table" so as to see whether they fit together

There is a new function called LUT (for "look-up table") which may be interesting once I find a way to write my own LUTs. There is, apparently, a possibility to use the 3D map produced by the iPhone internal camera, but it would not activate that on the iPad.

The application, while usable, seems a bit kludgy to me as it is built around the internal "Photos" database. OTOH, this has the advantage that one can always be sure that the data remains accessible, should the application be discontinued. However "What data" is not quite clear to me, as the raw image is paired with a jpeg and it is not entirely clear to me how the edits are saved.

 

[rketoimg]

You had a good organiser of photography on iOS to sort, collect and edit your images in some time in your artistic life. The aperture is a useful software for these tasks, but you do not want the revenue model from Adobe to be able to edit something more functional and powerful. I chose for you on that occasion the Capture One.

I hope you'll be happy with the editing potential of Capture One. You can set different options on your images with the software. Contrast, light, shadow, and exposure can be changed. Some warm or cold tones are easily added to increase exposure or add filters to achieve an artistic effect.

 

[Jerome Marot]

Yes, Capture One is something I did not think about, mostly because I am a bit worried about Phase One financial health. But I should try it. Actually, I should still be able to download a free version for my Sony camera.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Yes, Capture One is something I did not think about, mostly because I am a bit worried about Phase One financial health. But I should try it. Actually, I should still be able to download a free version for my Sony camera.

Jérôme,

What makes you worry about Phase One’s financial health?

is it the competition from Ricoh Pentax and Fuji?

Also, in any case, isn’t it still likely that Capture One would be split off as a separate and viable company?

Asher

 

[Jerome Marot]

What makes you worry about Phase One’s financial health?

Their market base is eroding. They used to sell expensive cameras to professional photographers who needed tethering in studio. I think that this market shrunk considerably. There still is a market for museums and aerial photography, but I am not sure it is sufficient.

Also, in any case, isn’t it still likely that Capture One would be split off as a separate and viable company?

Or bought by Adobe and killed off.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Their market base is eroding. They used to sell expensive cameras to professional photographers who needed tethering in studio. I think that this market shrunk considerably. There still is a market for museums and aerial photography, but I am not sure it is sufficient.



Or bought by Adobe and killed off.

That would be disgusting! Miserable possibility!

Phase One, themselves did it too Iview Media Pro!

But they allowed it to breathe for nearly a decade! Now they offer Capture One as a Catalog Maker. Haven’t figured it out yet!

Asher