Why Apple KILLED Aperture

[@matthewTobrien]

So what'ya think? Is this plausible? If not, why do YOU think Apple axed Aperture?

[@KaiseroftheBlade]

I’m not sure, but my dumbass thought you were talking about Aperture Science from Portal!

[@AlexChama]

Hmm, I initially typed up a pretty long reply and then the tab reloaded and now that's gone. Anyhow, I'll boil it down to the essentials: 1) transformative work: I think you're really underestimating how transformative working with photos really is. The same logic you apply to what makes photo editing less transformative could be applied in many aspects to filmmaking as well. You say nobody gets credited for good color-grading, but if you think photo editing is color grading on stereoids then you really miss how transformative photo editing - even just adjusting - is. 2) even if that wasn't the case, the same reason for killing Aperture could also negate its need to create it, especially if you quote Steve Job's (correctly for this context) about what Apple tries to achieve beyond technical innovation. 3) The elephant in the room clearly is lack of market share within its respective field COMBINED with new technical hurdles eventually hitting the fan making it harder for them to justify lugging Aperture around. I'm sure it could have been justifyable to keep it around and they'd have done many folks a great favor, but they are in it for the money and Aperture kept software engineers busy working on something they didn't sell to many folks in the field when they could have otherwise - as they did - to lay off some of them or route them to different departments saving money and/or resources. If you think Aperture conceptually went against their vision to empower professional photographers I think you're not missing a few points at once with all due respect.

[@jeffchastain2977]

Adobe threatened lawsuits.

[@matthewTobrien]

@@jeffchastain2977 Is that true? If so, any proof of that? That could make for an interesting follow-up video...

[@matthewTobrien]

@@AlexChama First off, let me just say how much I appreciate your tone here, Alex. I love that we can have a constructive debate about this, so THANK YOU for that. And so sorry your initial reply got messed up - I have found myself selecting all of my text and copying it regularly when writing a long reply in the comments. I've had too many vanish on me due to some random refresh or glitch. For me, when I look at making a video or filmmaking using Final Cut Pro, I'm staring at a bunch of ingredients that can't really exist as anything significant on their own. I've got flour, eggs, sugar, salt, butter. There's not much there until you measure and mix together, bake them, etc. With a photo and photo editing software I feel like you're starting with an already baked cake with a base coat of delicious icing already there. The camera and the photography did the foundation work to get things started. And the photo editing app is analogous to all the extra icing and decorative accents that a master baker might do to enhance that cake. Whereas with the video editing stuff - you've got all these ingredients and you could make a croissant, you could make a cake, you could make a dinner roll, etc. It's less defined when you sit down and start using the app. With Aperture you started with a cake and you enhanced that cake into something incredible but you didn't transform its essence from being a cake. This is how I see it and I am 100% happy to be wrong about thinking about it that way. I think the hangup in all of this is my definition of transformative versus perhaps your definition of transformative. One thing we can agree on though - photographers do INCREDIBLE work both with the camera and the editing software (or in the darkroom) no doubt about it.

[@michaelch5060]

I really wish they would have kept Aperture, I hate paying Adobe monthly and I think that Aperture could have been a better product

[@matthewTobrien]

Agreed. Absolutely. I still refuse to subscribe to anything Adobe. I’ll deal with Photos + Affinity Photo + RNI Films.

[@CurtTerpstra]

Affinity Photo is an excellent Mac photo software. It also has an iPad version and one price for all of their software on all the different platforms.

[@michaelch5060]

Thanks Curt, how is Affinity Photo for cataloging and managing a large number of images, I hate to say it but LightRoom does this very well, it''s the reason I've stuck with them.

[@RichAesthetic]

Have you tried pixelmator? I’m not sure how advanced the edits you make are, but I really like the experience of using pixelmator and Photomator

[@michaelch5060]

I have Pixelmator and use it from time to time, but most of m edits I use LightRoom and will switch over to Photo Shop for more complex stuff, to be honest, it's just so easy, I really need to spend the time to learn Pixelmator as well as I know Photo Shop. The thing I'm really looking for is a way to manage photos, Light Room does. great job of it and I've yet to find an application that does it equally or as well. @@RichAesthetic

[@dannypgrizzle]

The discontinuation of Aperture was a devastating loss to me personally, career altering really, and I still have not recovered. Today, I keep a Mac Mini configured and specifically dedicated to access my enormous Aperture library. When you are dealing with hundreds of thousands of RAW and extremely large TIFF scans, tools designed for iPhones and cloud storage are simply an absurd approach, and cannot be considered a professional solution.

[@matthewTobrien]

Oh wow. I still have my old Aperture library file, but I haven’t ever needed to get into it. I also wasn’t a pro photographer. But I wonder if I could set up my 2010 iMac to run Aperture 3 and actually use it effectively as my main photo editing software 🤔 I mean, why not?

[@marcusnz232]

My Aperture library still exists (assuming the Drobo it’s on still works) but despite several attempts to import it into Lightroom, I never succeeded in successfully doing so.

[@daveed4475]

I’m a hobbyist photographer, yet I still have aperture running on a 2011 MBP for my huge library. It’s still a great tool.

[@darpompie4354]

Devastating loss are great words for the many of us that were deep in with Aperture. That day was the day I lost trust in Apple and it has cost them in both hardware and software sales for sure. No matter what the theory or reality of why they chose to discontinue it, the end result is they inflicted a huge ripple of irreparable damage to the Pro community and ultimately themselves. Although we use and prefer FCP, we use it sparingly and tentatively knowing that it could be gone tomorrow. Hopefully the decision to kill aperture the way they did, was worth the trust they lost.

[@nuttick]

@@daveed4475Me too. I keep my library on a RAID in an off-line Mac Pro (also wired to a backup drive out in the shed). Aperture works fine for me.

[@brokeboogeyman]

I LOVED aperture and stand firmly that if they rebuilt it for today's workflow it would crush other editors.

[@sreynolds777]

Nothing out there is formatted nearly as well as Aperture for working through event and studio photos. So miss it. I still have it available on an older Mac for my old libraries - which is much better than converting them to Photos.

[@BYCWELL]

😲 love how you broke that down.

[@CompleteMisc]

I’m not sure I can get on board with your argument. Some of the most iconic photos in history we really “made” in the darkroom. The original photo was just one piece much like the melody track of a song is just the starting point. I think this was a pure business decision plain and simple. The Lightroom/Photoshop pair was just too big and powerful to meaningfully compete with and Apple doesn’t like to do anything where they can be a big player. With both Final Cut and Logic, Apple had significant market share and so they survived.

[@matthewTobrien]

I just want to say how much I appreciate your constructive and rational disagreement with my point of view. This is so refreshing, and I greatly appreciate you sharing your opinion on why Aperture got killed.

[@thebloo12]

Agreed

[@paucc]

I do agree, Apple make superb products, but they are also extremely good at business oriented products. If something doesn't return (at the medium term) the investment, they shift. And that's the key word, shifting, transforming; not as Google, that discards the products that doesn't return.

[@coreforce9872]

I wish they kept Aperture. They made the best turrets ever. 3:

[@srrrennn]

😂

[@chrisdals5182]

Netflix shouldn’t have cancelled Mindhunter. Now that was really criminal.😢

[@matthewTobrien]

💯💯💯

[@jimtincher7357]

I miss Aperture, it was much faster than LightRoom and more stable than Capture One. Anyone who used Aperture wasn't about to store anything in iCloud, so I disagree with you there. Photo's is a piece of crap on both desktops and IOS.

[@matthewTobrien]

I don't know - I imagine *some* would have used iCloud as a way to sync Aperture libraries if an iPad app had been developed. I know I would have. I've tried Capture One but there's no cataloguing... And Affinity Photo is closer to Photoshop than Lightroom.

[@joshmaday1462]

I would totally have used iCloud with Aperture. In fact, in the later years, I really felt it was a missing feature. The thing for me with Aperture, was that it allowed me to have my photo library, where my photos already were, and it gave me really powerful tools to catalogue and edit them, right there where they already lived. Photos seemed to have the same goal in mind, but the editing and cataloguing tools aren't nearly as good.

[@AlexChama]

@@matthewTobrien Aperture had Photostream support, so a technical foundation for integrating it into iCloud was not just an idea that got tossed, but evidently started, implemented and working. If anything iCloud could have been a key reason FOR keeping Aperture around. Imagine all the pro photographers possibly getting upsold to "reliable, automatically redundant and safe - always accessible storage" en masse. Convenience, easily implemented, but sold at a premium... $$$ The reason why Aperture had to die was that it had no market share. The ones who DID use it, mostly used it passionately and valued it for all the things it had to offer since Aperture was so unique in a market completely dominated by Adobe with some breadcrumbs left over for a few others. 2010's was a LOT less diverse for photo editing and management than today. And even today you get a weird look from fellow photographers when you mention you don't use Adobe Photoshop or Lightroom. Apple's desktop market share back in the 2010s was tiny, they just had a few years of the sales-boosting halo effect of going x86 and making dual-boot (and hence a soft switch) going for them. The Mac users that they had who... a) also happened to be photographers, b) who also happened to ask for "the niche tool" in a space completely dictated by an option available on cheaper hardware as well must have been extremely hard to justify reserving money and (human) resources for.

[@ahall3823]

I wish Aperture was back. I’d ditch Adobe in a heat beat.

[@matthewTobrien]

You and many more from what it looks like…

[@staiain]

same, adobe's raw conversion of fujifilm x-trans is the worst and creates worming artifacts, but adobe is the only one that offers 10 bit rec.2020 hdr avif export :(

[@glennsak]

I loved Aperture. I was devastated when they ended support for it.

[@thecinematicguy]

Great video! Thank you for making it. I was an avid user of Aperture and was sad with its demise but rightly so, as you pointed out, I then reluctantly switched to Lightroom and was delighted/ surprised at its level of feature set so yes Aperture was stuck in the doldrums for some time. I too got a free license when of Aperture when I worked at Apple and loved it. I think your ‘philosophical’ theory on the why of your video is totally spot on. I never came to your conclusion but now that I’ve seen it I cannot imagine any other explanation because I cannot imagine it existing in today’s mobile world and iCloud driven workflows. Thank you for your thoughtful take on this video. On a personal note, I happened to be chopping broccoli while watching this video as I prepared dinner for tonight so that was very poetic timing. 😂😊

[@matthewTobrien]

Haha - poetic indeed! And thanks for the kind words. I have to imagine the bulk of the factors that led to the decision to kill Aperture were much more practical/logical/financial, but I like to think that they also really looked closely at how an app like Aperture leads to much less emotional satisfaction in the user in comparison to Logic Pro and FCP. It's a hot take for sure but one I felt worth sharing. Appreciate you watching!

[@sebastianchamaca499]

To be completely honest with you the only thing I’ve taken away from this video is our color grading deserves its own set of awards as well. In the Oscars there a distinction made between Sound design and sound mixing since those are two different processes that lead to different results, but they are both held in highest team, but they are both equally as important. In my opinion, color grading is a huge part of defining the style and fuel and tone of a film, I feel like we’re selling colorists short of what their impact is when making a movie

[@matthewTobrien]

I hear you. And I in no way want to make it seem like I think colorists' work is insignificant, less meaningful, etc. They can certainly enhance every frame of the movie in profound ways... But I hold to my argument that they don't generally *transform* the image... And there absolutely should be awards for colorists - I hope the Academy continues to add awards for categories like Stunts & Stunt Coordination as well as Color. 100%.

[@AlexChama]

@@matthewTobrien Maybe we need to figure out each of our definitions of transformation, because going by my definition I couldn't disagree more. Take Merriam-Webster's definition for example, and it will apply to color-grading, hue-shifting, photo manipulation, almost any photographic value adjustment area, ESPECIALLY in RAW editing and beyond: "1 a: to change in composition or structure b: to change the outward form or appearance of c: to change in character or condition"

[@ovidiuspatacian-tarnu1265]

Apple has been working closely with Pixelmator which seems to understand Apple's vision of creating a magical experience. I think Pixelmator is not far from catching up with Adobe especially with the release of Photomator/Pixelmator Pro. I really love their deep integration with macOS, especially their newly released file browser.

[@DensDigitalDen]

Apple Shake was a high-end compositing and visual effects application that was widely used in the film and television industry. It was originally developed by a company called Nothing Real and was first released in 1999. In 2002, Apple Inc. acquired Nothing Real and continued to develop and sell Shake as a high-end tool for visual effects professionals. However, in 2009, Apple announced that it would discontinue Shake and instead focus on developing its other visual effects and motion graphics tool, Motion. Motion 5 is now old, under developed and trailing behind as a compositing and visual effects application. For a company that claims to support artists, the lack of development in Apple's so called Professional Apps is startling.

[@CarlosBenjamin]

I’m using a photo editor on the iPad created by the guy who was (I think) the lead program engineer for Aperture. RawPhoto is pretty comprehensive, and the developer is very open to suggestions. Several features were added once I asked for them.

[@matthewTobrien]

Does it handle cataloguing of photos or does it just edit one photo at a time? And is it more like editing that Aperture does or closer to Photoshop with manipulation?

[@CarlosBenjamin]

@@matthewTobrien I’d say it’s more of a Lightroom type app primarily for editing. You can copy an edit and propagate it across many images. You’d need another app to do Photoshop style edits. Plus there are some limitations imposed by Apple, so there’s no editing of metadata.

[@olrogerio]

Great video!! Thanks! I particularly believe that Aperture was one of those products that had only a solitary and fervent defender within Apple, but was swallowed up by the change in technology. Aperture was, like Final Cut Pro 7, designed from an analog perspective of image editing. I agree with your argument about the artistic nature of photography and image editing, but the reason for the app's demise seems simpler and more pragmatic to me: 1. Rewriting Aperture would be too expensive and wouldn't bring any advantages over Photos. 2. The "mass" of Aperture users was much smaller than the thousands of new "non-professionals" Apple users coming through the purchase of iPhones. Having said that, with regard to FCP, I hope that Apple really does see it, as we do, as a powerful communication tool and decides to reverse this image of software that has stopped in time, speeding up the development cycle and competing with other tools that use the release of features as a strategy to gain market share.

[@iTrensharo]

Magnetic Timeline was so revolutionary that almost no other NLE attempted to replicated. The only thing that came close was the Cut Page in Resolve... and that's a page designed for content creators who need to whip out quick videos for social media, etc. BMD went out of their way regurgitating word salad in an attempt to not piss off their Pro user base when the Cut Page was introduced, so people wouldn't complain about them spending development time on that instead of other things, Lol. Apple shifted their focus away from Professionals and over to Prosumers and Creators when they moved to Final Cut and Logic Pro X. iPhoto and Aperture were outliers. Their target market didn't need DAM software like that, and the market was already well-covered with options like Lightroom and Capture One. Did people think all that "the best camera you own is in your pocket" marketing was all for nothing? If Final Cut Pro [X] were on Windows, it would play in the same tier of the market as options like VEGAS Pro and Video Pro X. Logic Pro would slot in around the same tier as Studio One Professional. Apple Motion would be more comparable to HitFilm than After Effects or Fusion Studio. Logic Pro would slot in right next to Studio One Professional. The Price and Update Strategy (very low LTCO for the end-user) is what holds them up substantially on macOS. Part of the reason why Pro Apps port/stay on macOS while lots of mid-market options do not is precisely because they would be heavily gatekept by Logic and Final Cut Pro, while options like Cubase, Pro Tools, Resolve Studio, Media Composer, Premiere Pro, Fusion Studio, After Effects and others are not. As a result, porting to target an additional

[@thomasgoetze]

Well, composing pictures is IMHO like composing music and videos. BTW: I use Final Cut and Logic. Back to my opinion. You take the audio file and add anything what makes it glitter. Then you compose the riff, the rhythm, the voice and so on, mix it carefully and create a song. Similar to video. You make a bunch of clips, let them shine and cut and compose the film. So, instead of making the rhythm or the clip, you take a photo of people, scenes, events and so on. Then you make it shine, modify it to speak a language of color and composition and compose them with the other photos to an article in web, or print or an exhibition. On this stage of photography, you create an event similar to a song or film. Giving an album a straight consistent sound or the film an individual picture language is the same act as composing an exhibition about e.g. the drug scene in a city. The result isn't the photo. The result is, like a film or a song, the perfect combination of pictures showing something new to the audience. I don't know why Apple discontinued Aperture. It might be, that picture editing is a thing which has no credibility for young people. Serving the pros with a good App on the other hand is a constant feature race which cost a lot of time and money. Before Aperture, people use Photoshop to do the task. Aperture became a direct competitor of Adobes main cash cow Photoshop. Perhaps they "gave it" to Adobe, step out of the feature race, plus avoid Adobe leaving the Mac. In the early 2000's this was a real threat for Apple. That time, Adobe was "picture and print". Adobe isn't pro video and music. So, they sacrifice Aperture to hold Adobe on the Mac. Just my two cents.

[@ianiles6430]

I wish they had kept supporting Aperture, but Capture One Pro now does the job really well.

[@dylanjohndickerson]

Let's hope this is the year that Apple does some work on the app that we love. I'd hate to see it suffer the same fate as Aperture. Great video, Matthew!

[@matthewTobrien]

I certainly hope so (and sorry for the late reply). I think we're safe (especially with FCP for iPad being released) but still in dire need a lot more focus and development from Apple.

[@AnthonyRecenello]

Aperture would have so much catching up to do

[@matthewTobrien]

They sure would.

[@iamericlenz]

Interesting argument, Matthew. Hearing your thoughts, I was sceptical at first, but hearing your reasoning made me agree. Man, I'm hyped about the upcoming months in FCP world. Even though I'd argue that beginner colourists, especially, do transformative work on low/no-projects where they have to make up for the fact that the production didn't have a gaffer. :D

[@matthewTobrien]

That’s exactly the flow I was hoping viewers would experience. I have to think someone at Apple broke down the key differences between the Pro Apps Apple was keeping and Aperture. Or maybe it was as simple as: “we don’t want to compete with the 1-2 punch of Photoshop/Lightroom it’s more economical to focus on a single consumer photo app rather than two separate photo apps.” I’d like to think that some on the Aperture team really fought for it 🤷‍♂️

[@RafaelLudwig]

Oh man, I really hope they lean into FCP - and just go gangbusters! Don't have to HAVE to fully transition to DR. Great thoughts Matthew!

[@matthewTobrien]

Me too, friend! Thanks for watching.

[@seanp2k617]

Blackmagic is eating Adobe’s lunch with Resolve. FCP was pretty much killed off when they nerfed it in v10, and they’re still not back on par with the features of FCP7. It’s an ipad app for prosumers now. Parasite (2019) was made with FCP7. These pro markets are a drop in the bucket for them so they’re more than happy to reroute resources to figuring out how to get an extra 1% of customers to pay for iCloud.

[@m.hreels9822]

Dude I always wondered this thank you for making this video

[@matthewTobrien]

You’re welcome! Not sure if it’s the REAL reason, but that would have been my reason if I was CEO at the time.

[@creightonholub]

Apple was doing heavy system updates for Aperture, instead of just minor updates as new cameras were coming out. There are way fewer video camcorders released, compared to having to reverse engineer a ton of still cameras.

[@motionfxes]

The only thing that Apple needs to do is adding support for RAW formats when a camera has a new one. This is embedded in the OS, so they still need to do it for Photos and other apps.

[@TroyPudney]

What I miss most from Aperture was the library cataloguing within the library and not just a reference link. Create a project library and keep all photos, edits and exports within that library. I have gone silicon but do have an older Macbook Pro on hand in case. Have converted the Aperture Libraries to Apple Photo but not the same.

[@eagereyes]

Interesting! Though I'd argue that the lack of an Oscar for color grading is because it's a relatively new thing and the Oscars move slowly. There has always been cinematography, there has always been editing, there have been special effects for over 100 years too - but color grading as its own thing (that isn't just fixing mistakes) is fairly recent.

[@matthewTobrien]

Yeah, but there has been color timing of film, etc. for a long time. Is that work as extensive as modern color correction/grading? No. But I still think all of that work only enhances the image rather than fundamentally transform it. Does it still take immense talent and skill to do it? 100%.

[@oberon2230]

Hi fellow farmer, I too worked for Apple, very happy to be out of the farm. Aperture was an amazing app, started off strong and had a mild wave of upgrades but, sadly Apple lost interest in photography as its aim was never to make good photographers, it was a product made to show that their Macs were good enough for Photographers as well. It was to promote Macs into a new market for photographers. Apple was grooming new generations to be comfortable enough with editing styles and how to edit in a world growing fast into social media standards of video styles. Video had a greater focus on the common consumer. Which brings me to another App Apple just killed for no good reason... SHAKE. Remember Shake? Shake was promoted as an incredible cinematic tool, showing off how some scenes used that in Lord of the Rings etc. But then suddenly it got cancelled. Why? Because Apple wasn't interested in Hollywood, it was just interested in prestige and how to promote their brand as one who could do anything if they wanted. The teams involved at the time I worked at Apple were suddenly just moved from one project to another, killing SHAKE. Apple Shake was amazing, but focus, interest and agenda at Apple wasn't allowing Shake to evolve beyond the "Look what we can do!" phase.

[@matthewTobrien]

I wonder too if Apple's lack of interest in continuing FC Studio coincided with Jobs leaving his position as CEO of Pixar. I have to think that while he was CEO the team there spoke a lot about their struggles with quality software that allowed them to post-produce those early Pixar films. Did Jobs see the need for a suite of apps like FC Studio and decided to buy all of the apps and overhaul them for pro users? Once he stopped splitting his focus between CEO duties at Apple and Pixar, his intensity for developing those apps waned... Just a thought.

[@tayloriginals999]

I had just started in photography around 2012 when I was using Aperture to edit my photos as well as catalog them. When they killed it, my workflow changed fundamentally and it was a bummer. I am a simple hobbyist and I don't want to get Lightroom because it's just too costly, but I was lucky enough to discover Affinity Photo and I was able to alter my workflow, but I kinda wish they hadn't killed Aperture and continued to update and support it.

[@JimEdds]

I just axed Adobe for good including Lightroom. What are you using? Thanks Matthew love your vids.

[@matthewTobrien]

Thanks for the Super Thanks! I use the Affinity apps combined with Photos (and I'm installing Aperture 3 on my 2013 Mac to edit and catalogue my 35mm film stills). Happy to be Adobe free!

[@JimEdds]

@@matthewTobrien Awesome thanks!

[@Van-dh5ry]

What did you end up with?

[@JimEdds]

@@Van-dh5ry I tried Affinity I think it was but went back to LR.

[@wfp9378]

Apple certainly created an emotional response in me…. Hate. iPhoto and Aperture were both EXCELLENT. They replaced them with detestable junk. It’s the same logic as to why we don’t have a calculator on the iPad. Some upper echelon fools whim.

[@stevensonrf]

Matthew very thought-provoking video. Can you also maybe think about doing a video about why Apple also killed shake? By the way, I love your thumbnail for this video. You are a true creative, no doubt about it.😬👍

[@matthewTobrien]

A video on Shake would be pretty interesting... Definitely will consider it, especially since so few know about Shake (I mostly only know that it existed).

[@anthonyarruda3703]

Still running Aperture 3 on my 2011 iMac. Still has a good work flow and prints great photos, has everything I need for my photography work.

[@KenJonesRealEstateAdvisor]

Having only attempted to use Aperture many years ago, I really didn't get a good feel for its benefits and liabilities, so I'm unable to speak to those issues. However, as a daily user of Photoshop, Lightroom, Final Cut Pro, and Logic Pro, I found this to be a VERY interesting and thought provoking analysis. Thanks.

[@KingfisherTalkingPictures]

I used to be a Creative (in-store teacher) and loved evangelizing and using Aperture. The database underlying it was amazing. Photos’ database is sad comparatively and breaks down all the time. My friends went with Photo One, but the cost is so much higher. And the cost for Adobe is such a pain.

[@georgestiros4392]

I have not updated my IMac because Aperture won't work. I only use Aperture and LOVE It. So sad that Apple killed the best editing system.

[@matthewTobrien]

Dedication!!!

[@transitengineer]

I have it on my 2010, "mac mini" duel booting into OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard and OS X 10.13 High Sierra (smile...smile).

[@Old-School-Liberal]

I would love to not use Light Room I’m not a fan of Adobe. Editing photos and videos are like doing chores around the house. I don’t like it but it needs to be done.

[@matthewTobrien]

I enjoy it and use a combo of Photos, Affinity Photo and the RNI Films app. I love the idea of Lightroom but I refuse to subscribe to Adobe products (with frame.io being the exception).

[@pixelmixture3067]

not a single day without regreting aperture

[@matthewTobrien]

Such a disappointment...

[@pixelmixture3067]

@@matthewTobrien it’s more than that … it’s a very bad message sent to pros … “don’t invest in our solutions cause we can shut the whole thing down if we want to”

[@transitengineer]

Thank you, for sharing your thoughtful view points concerning why Apple, Inc. may have killed off their "Aperture" software. However, I totally disagree "Aperture" is one of Apple's best and most useful software products and, it was a natural upgrade from Apple's consumer photo editor software "iPhoto" for users who needed more capability. This is one of several reasons, I keep an old Intel "mac mini" with OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard because, it fully supports Aperture 3 (smile...smile).

[@TasteofTaboo]

they also not really touched motion for a lot of years… it was such an amazing software which was more or less forgotten by apple

[@matthewTobrien]

It seems like it’s really there as a companion app to FCP to allow for the making and modification of plug-ins and custom effects.

[@TasteofTaboo]

@@matthewTobrien and it was so much more. I loved working with it ...

[@motionfxes]

While I agree with most of your arguments, the reality is that if Apple does not start to release updates with new features on a regular basis, the FCP market share will continue to shrink to its dead. I hope that now that we have FCP for iPad and Mac, we will see updates more often. But with Apple, you never know what is going to happen next. BTW, I also think that lowering the price of FCP to 149 or 199$ could help to raise its sales.

[@seecraig]

Or perhaps drop iMovie and include a free version of FCP with every Mac purchase and a paid feature upgrade (consider Blackmagic and CapCut have free versions and paid upgrades).

[@jessejayphotography]

I see FCP moving in the direction of CapCut not DR. Apple has featured DR extensively in their keynotes. Final Cut is now on the iPad. I think Apple is going to simplify FCP and move it to the realm of "empowering" new, casual video editors with AI assistance with cutting, syncing, and audio for social media.

[@MrSamPhoenix]

With the release of the upcoming macOS and iOS I could see Apple taking about jab at photo manipulation. Especially with A.I. driving the photos app.

[@matthewTobrien]

Agreed!

[@pd1jdw630]

Wasn’t that the team that got bought out to adobe? I remember a huge settlement in 2015? Where the big companies kept outrasing each others employees to come work for the other. I thought that was more or less the case with the team from aperture.

[@sclogse1]

I have a system 10.6 Imac loaded with graphics apps. Being 10.6 I still have QuickTime 7 and ITunes. No online anymore with it, but I have a newer model for that. So I still have Photoshop CS4, 5, and 6. Plus all the Final Cut I need and great audio apps. I've backed up this system.

[@Hatnap22]

Always used the Bridge/Photoshop combination for my work. Tried Aperture when it launched but never commited to it tbh. Know of a colleague or two who did who paid the price in heartache when Apple killed it. Apple has a history of killing stuff... think Aperture, reset of Final Cut, got out of server business as well. Personally never moved to Lightroom as the idea of moving my existing file sturucture/images to a catalogue system was not going to happen. Bridge, to sort, rename, add captions and batch process is my go to workflow

[@batsonelectronics]

I recently was forced to retire due to health problems, but I still use Aperture 3 on a 2012 27" IMAC running 10.14. ( the last os to support it ) my photo catalog is around 100,000 images. I have a 2018 Mini with 64gb ram for video and everything else. I will run these 2 machines until I die. I love Aperture and although I also have Lightroom, Aperture is just better for me. I still use CS3 as well. Why be forced to buy and learn new software when what you have works for you ? I was disappointed in Apple for killing Aperture support. I would be ok to pay for an upgrade to make it compatible with OS 11- OS 13 even with no feature upgrades.

[@badbadley]

I've kept my 2011 17" laptop for the same reason. But because of my huge Aperture files, when I bought my 2018 laptop I couldn't move everything over to its 1 TB SSD. An Apple advisor had me store a copy of all my Aperture files on a HDD the erase them (gulp) from the old laptop so everything else could make the move. I later put the Aperture libraries back on the 2011 but found I had a lot of black rectangles where images used to be. I spoke with the Professional Products group at Apple, and found nobody there at the time had even worked with Aperture. They suggested that I convert my Aperture libraries to Photos (the only way you can keep the edits done on them) then find some new software to use going forward. But until I got my M2 Mini, with larger drives, I had no way to do the conversions. Nor can I now, because the current OS can't convert Aperture files to Photos. So I've lost 20 years of production! Apple should be ashamed of itself.

[@batsonelectronics]

@@badbadley did they have you copy your aperture.library file or something from pictures ? aperture.library is the file you needed to copy. I run a 10.14 machine with version 3 and will just keep using it for my library, and got an Intel 2018 mini that runs OS 13 for everything else. I clone my drives as backups so I could always pull from the clone. Apple has it builtin ( time machine ) I use a 2TB thunderbolt ssd as my boot drive for my mini, so I have a 3rd copy of everything, even if aperture won't run on it, the library file is there. I specifically bought an intel machine because you can boot externally even if the builtin ssd dies, you can't do that with any of the M chips. If the ssd dies on the M chip, you are outta luck and the machine is a brick.

[@Hugodra]

Love it so much I use it to edit my pre 2010 dslr photos, have a mavericks partition on my 2013 Mac Pro and it is so smooth and amazing. For my mirrorless lightroom is the option. Read good things about photomator pro, but the combination of photos app is a no for me. Hopefully they allow a file manager in the future

[@thaJeztah]

Still sad they killed it. While some other options may have had the edge in some editing capabilities, the combination of photo management, editing and overall integration was really unparalleled.

[@matthewTobrien]

Nailed it. 100% agree.

[@juurstudio]

Honestly it feels as if Apple has for quite some time decided not to make apps for pros any longer. One of the most prominent Motion tutors Simon Ubsdell recently called Motion "obsolete" (yes in a sort of provocative manner but still), and we can almost start wondering whether FCP is heading in the same direction, especially given how many new and exciting features Premier has and is consistently receiving. The other big problem with Apple software is Apple's silence about any of its products, which makes it so unreliable and uncertain. However much we hate Adobe for its subscription model, at least they are speaking to us and listening us, and in a big way, through their open beta program for all their apps, their Adobe Live community etc. Apple is still killing it on the hardware and OS front though, but as a long term FCP user, I think i'm almost decided to start transitioning over to Premier at this point.

[@matthewTobrien]

It too could be the result of the shift from Steve Jobs's perspective on why Apple develops apps versus Tim Cook's perspective on it. In all of my research I found one moment where Jobs talks about Apple developing apps allows them to set the bar for other app developers. If they make sure that their apps are of the highest quality, intuitiveness, etc. then the other app developers will have to follow their lead. I loved this line of thinking, and I think Apple has definitely set the bar in areas well beyond just apps. I mean look at all the high quality packaging we get with our various tech products simply because these companies know that if they want to communicate quality to their customers, they have to package their products like Apple does.

[@sidewinder3000]

Your theory makes sense. I just wish things had played out differently. I wish that when Apple realized that Aperture wasn’t special enough to be an Apple product that they had worked overtime to make it more special. To make it live up to the logo. To transform it into something truly… transformative. Why? Because I think it’s essential that Apple never abandon creators. The true pros that make stuff and drive art & entertainment forward. Creatives were the main holdovers who helped keep Apple afloat during their dark years, and the cache that comes with being the computer used by the coolest/most creative people you know is key. Think Different didn’t celebrate an inordinate number of artists and creators by accident. It’s who Apple is. I believe that when you have a closed ecosystem or walled garden, you have a great advantage but also a sacred responsibility: to make sure that whomever invests in your products and entrusts Apple with their professional or artistic fate never be caught without important resources that they need. Sure Lightroom exists, but that is outside of Apple’s control. Something that Apple has worked very hard over the years to avoid. Were Adobe ever to abandon the Mac version of Lightroom, for financial or strategic reasons, or even just put fewer resources behind Mac development, Apple and its users would be hosed. Strategically, it feels like Apple made themselves and creatives who use their products more vulnerable by ceding ground to allow a monopoly. Who knows what Adobe’s fate will be? But if they were bought by Microsoft Apple would be in a bad position. So yeah, I think your theory has merit, and goes a long way to explaining why Apple did what they did. I just wish they’d dug deep to make it a truly special and transformative product, even if it was a marginal profit maker, in order to maintain some degree of control and keep creatives who trust Apple with their lives a little safer and more secure within that walled garden.

[@MarcelMolleman]

I used Aperture a lot! With my RAW images, it suited perfectly for my needs! I still miss it today, it just worked for me so good. I really hope that Apple is gonna reverse course and raise Aperture from the dead. R.I.P. Apple Aperture and just bring it back.

[@jesusnieto2403]

I can tell 5 Pro Apps that Apple bought and discontinued without being able to integrate them into their new developments, it's a shame because they were truly fabulous. Apple Aperture Apple Shake Apple Color Apple Final Cut Server Apple DVD Studio Pro I have a Maxed Out Mac Pro 5,1 within my studio running Sierra just to be able to use those softwares without any issues when the project requires it. My theory is that Adobe put strong pressure on Apple regarding the issue of Photoshop not being optimized for 64-bit in its Mac version. It makes no sense to have abandoned the development of Aperture; it was one of the reasons why photographers didn't consider Windows at all. Even today, I work better in Aperture + Adobe DNG Converter than in Lightroom or Capture One. The only RAWs that don't work converted to DNG in Aperture are those from the iPhone. I've tried noise reduction and other IA innovations in Lightroom, but even with all that, I still prefer my very old Aperture.

[@StreetsOfVancouverChannel]

I used to use Aperture everyday and miss using it… but now use DxO’s software for photo editing

[@matthewTobrien]

I’m thinking about snagging a copy from eBay and installing it on my 2010 Intel iMac…

[@PatFarrellKTM]

Interesting theory, makes sense. Might even be right. I bought Aperture and Lightroom on the same day back in 2012 or so. I loved Aperture. I was so sad when I had to migrate to Lightroom.

[@matthewTobrien]

Seems like it was a sad day for most who had to switch...

[@zwete]

I'd say the reason Apple kept supporting Final Cut and Logic was because those helped sell Apple hardware. Photoshop and Lightroom already had the majority of professional users and had always been on Apple's platforms. Aperture never offered anything that would make a Windows user switch or get a Mac user to upgrade just for the new features.

[@seecraig]

However, this does cause me to wonder why Apple doesn't kill iMovie and then include FCP with every Mac purchase or, to a lesser extent, do the same with GarageBand and Logic. Apple Pro Apps could once again be marketed to sell Apple hardware. If need be, they could generate revenue with a paid-for level of additional features (as Resolve or CapCut do) in addition to selling collaborative cloud features (Adobe, Blackmagic, and CapCut all do). While some focus on whether Apple will or won't kill the ProApps (and we know they won't) the more pressing question is what would motivate them to invest more resources in developing them to benefit the user without adding oppressive costs just as other developers are doing.

[@Argelius1]

I miss Aperture. Loved their brushes!

[@matthewTobrien]

I never used it enough to learn the brushes! But I have a copy of Aperture 3 coming in the mail...

[@DCuerpoJr]

I also wished Apple would keep Aperture and build further integration with the Photos app. At the moment, I have no desire to use the Photos App because it doesn’t provide any advanced editing tools.

[@MattParson]

Apple knew that “Pro” photographers and image makers were using Adobe. Apple loves to be the “for everybody” market. Apple “Photos” App is suffice for people that snap pictures with their iPhones. I could see apple eventually merging GarageBand and Logic into one music/audio creation app. Same with iMovie/Final Cut. Apple has no interest in competing with the growingly niche markets that Avid and other companies cater to.

[@johnatkinson1111]

I think the porting of Logic Pro and Final Cut Pro to the iPad shows that Apple isn’t quite done with the pro apps however there is some concern that they might make future versions for Mac become a subscription service like it is on iPad but as of right now these two apps seem to be safe

[@Kirkster131]

Loved Aperture. Have not really found a good replacement yet. Won’t use Adobe subscription crap. It’s not my profession so I can’t justify the cost.

[@itstheniceguyme]

So, from this perspective Apple thinks that the photos app is sufficient for that little bit of Transformational photo needs after it has been taken. HDR and stitching panoramas is done in (iPhone) cameras at the time of shutter release. Looking over to phase one (or other camera manufacturers), the timing is different. Capture raw only in camera and do the software stuff later on Mac.

[@ΑνδρέαςΠ-ι9ε]

Very interesting approach. Haven't thought about that and it makes sense!

[@matthewTobrien]

Thanks for watching!

[@f.remplakowski]

They should have opensourced it and given it a chance to become as successful in photography as Blender is for 3D.

[@matthewTobrien]

Wouldn't that have been awesome?

[@Keith80027]

I loved Aperture and was a firm user of Apple products both hardware, software and cloud. Apple stopped supporting me as a photographer around 2015 when they stopped supporting my 2009 tower with new OS, Aperture went south and Apple started supporting apple toys like tablets and other non business items. They dropped business people like a hot rock and I had to switch to PC in 2017 with a tower that support multiple removalable hard disks that I replace as they fill up with customer photos.

[@Dubious.Bovine]

Man, if Aperture got a remake and was solid I’d be back on a mac in a heartbeat.

[@WastedCheez]

aperture today would've been an amazing app for the ipad and a great replacement for lightroom. Aperture and iphoto was the two apps that I think Apple should've kept. Great apps that I greatly miss.

[@d3xmeister]

Aperture was amazing, still the best DAM software I used. So easy to use, simple but powerful, fast, with the best looking raw rendering regardless of what camera I used

[@pdcorlis]

Transitioned from Lightroom/Photoshop to Aperture shortly before Apple pulled the rug out from under us. Nothing works better, it is a real loss.

[@matthewTobrien]

Oh wow - brutal!

[@karellen00]

I heard there has been some sort of agreement between Apple and Adobe, Apple would have killed Flash, but as an exchange they would have killed Aperture too so Lightroom would get more users

[@LeeHarris]

I will never forgive Apple for this. I moved to C1 Pro which is the best but Aperture was more than sufficient and more intuitive

[@matthewTobrien]

I had a hard time with C1 Pro with my 35mm film scans. Cropping was painful and there was no way to copy and paste a crop that I could figure out. Admittedly I didn't devote A TON of time to it - there was enough friction in my trial period that I decided to move on to something else (Photos + RNI Films app)

[@skkver_runs]

What an insight! Very interesting point of view.

[@matthewTobrien]

Greatly appreciate you tuning in!

[@einsteinparrot]

If Apple doesn't start implementing automatic captioning, they will suffer. As a social media content creator, I have left FCP and started using Capcut.

[@fotogordon]

After Apple discontinued Aperture, I haven't bought any more Apple computers. I felt cheated by Apple. In the meantime I have bought 2 high-end Linux laptops and also replaced my iMac with a Linux computer. I have always found Aperture superior to Lightroom, the workflow was just much faster for me. As a reportage photographer, I always work in series, it is not about 1 top photo, but about a top series that tells a story and here too I find Aperture superior compared to Lightroom. my next smartphone and that of my family will no longer be Apple.

[@rlbink2498]

Killing Aperture was a purely busine$$ decision. This is why I am really worried about the future of Final Cut Pro - because of the link to Apple hardware sales. After years of languishing on Mac, the first serious change we saw to FCP and, to a lesser extent, Logic Pro, was on iPad, NOT the desktop Mac version. It could be that Apple wants to see if these apps will make a dent on iPad sales - for "content producers". On desktop, Da Vinci Resolve is clobberin' FCP, and, anecdotally at least, I can tell you that where I live and work, this continues to be an Adobe/DVR/Mac town all the way, when it comes to professional photo editing, creative design and video editing. So if folks are happy to buy M3 M4 M to the power of N Macs, iPads, etc, just to use non-Apple software on it, I just can't see Apple spending $$ keeping FCP on life support much longer!

[@mudi2000a]

Regarding Logic Pro I think the backlash for Apple could be huge if they cancelled it. Of course I don’t know if they would care. Also in the Audio world people in general hate subscriptions and several companies tried to bring subscription only apps and failed. Even protools backpedaled.

[@thomaskurz5617]

Think there were 3 main reasons they cut it. They had iphoto for the casual user Adobe had launched Lightroom at the smae time as Apple launched Aperture, and if I remember right they undercut their price It never reached the mass appeal to make it worth keeping a second program Most people that used Aperture liked it So they did the reasonable move for them, merging both iphoto and Aperture into photos. Giving casual users even more tools then before, and just accepting that they pissed off a minority of their users.

They really should developed photos app more. For video iphone + fcp is great but for photos you need to relay on adobe or capture one.

[@clearheart2658]

Apple should throw all in with FCP and motion..if they want content for Apple vision pro then they have to encourage artists to make content for it Motion should become like AE mixed with Spline 3d And FCP needs more improvement

[@WhittyPics]

How much Aperture is in the photos app?

[@staiain]

photos app support importing raw files but when you try to edit them it's clear you just edit a converted version and not the raw file itself

[@CurtTerpstra]

Interesting theory, and I think you may be right.

[@matthewTobrien]

Appreciate you watching and commenting!

[@cucumberforest]

Cinematographers will do anything to keep colorists down because they don't want the world to know how shoddy their images look if no colorist brought them to life.

[@seanmartinflix]

Lol

[@Travisharger]

Loved this.

[@matthewTobrien]

Thanks so much for saying so, Travis 🙌

[@supercellex4D]

WHAT? APPLE HAD A PHOTO EDITING APP? Would be a killer M1 feature

[@jcnash02]

I think they discontinued it because they don’t need it internally. They use the other programs for their own content.

[@matthewTobrien]

That's interesting. I hadn't thought of that. Maybe Tim was like, "Well, none of us ever use Aperture and Photos is just fine so let's get rid of it."

[@McDughf]

I'm actually glad they killed aperture. Wait, hear me out first! I used it religiously for my business and I absolutely LOVED the intuitive way it worked. It was by far the best photo app I owned, hands down. But if Apple didn't kill it off, I never would have started using Capture One Pro. And believe me, the difference this software makes is unbelievable. Looking back I now realise that Aperture made my raw files look very soft and fluffy, and even with sharpening they still do not match the result capture one yields with little to no raw processing involved. ( at the time, I thought my camera or lenses were not sharp - that there was always something missing and just not quite hitting the mark. I believed Aperture was showing me the true end result of my work. I never believed my photos could look better until I switched and my word I could not believe the difference) I'm currently going through my photos from over a decade ago that were processed with Aperture and next to a capture one raw file they look like they were shot on a toy camera. Loved Aperture, but happy it was retired.

[@matthewTobrien]

I admit that I probably didn't give Capture One enough time, but I used it for about a week to crop and edit my 35mm film scans and the process was brutal. Especially cropping. Perhaps its much better when you're not having to crop dozens of images before you start editing...

[@BBnose]

It may also be considered to avoid violating the competition laws.

[@nielsweckwarth8627]

Aperture was a stop-gap solution to promote Mac OS X and to convince or sometimes extort developers and companies to convert their apps from MAC OS 9. I vividly remember Carbon apps. Do you?

[@damiansantillan1772]

I continue using it because for me it is a great tool. I would like them to revive it.

[@4Bakers]

my stupid brain interpreting the title as "Game Theory: Why Apple's Market Share Would Push Aperture Science out of the Tech Sector" I was very surprised to find this wasn't a video about Portal 2

[@OrlandoTiquim]

Apple the new villain of Portal 3

[@matthewTobrien]

A lot of people keep mentioning Portal, and I have zero clue what it is 🤣🤷‍♂️

[@OrlandoTiquim]

@@matthewTobrien LOL Dunno if this is an ironic message but it's a historical puzzle video game franchise pretty known for its unique coolest portals mechanic in which there's an evil corporation behind everything called Aperture Science Laboratories, with a lens logo indeed Portal fans can be a little overwhelming with references that may refer to it so get used :P Also how didn't u know about that game!!!! Def go take a look, it's like one the most memorable icons of games history - Keep in mind tho it has some acid humor

[@m.hreels9822]

Yeah Aperture used to be the professional iPhoto app back then

[@matthewTobrien]

Sure was, and I loved it.

[@ram_chopade_cr]

I liked this vid. I Know Apple makes Great Software Products like Prores, Logic Pro, ( And I Think Da Vinci Resolve is Better ). I heavily Respect that Apple Focuses on Tech Products To be Used for Actual Workflows in life to inspire people. They really have made Possible for people to use their tech and not bother about tech at all, instead using the tech to make something Meaningful. I love it. But I would Really like That they release these Software Products without the Compulsion to take their Hardware.

[@Bakin]

Amazing, the Apple employees featured sound like pre-programmed robots with memorized speaking points; empowering their customers but using less than empowered group talking points!

[@MarsViolet]

I think Apple decided that iPhones were the future of photography, and Aperture wasn't helping to sell iPhones. Plus Aperture was aimed at professional photographers anyway, most of whom had settled on Lightroom.

[@MarsViolet]

Also, Motion's days are for sure numbered, and most likely Final Cut Pro's too.

[@matthewTobrien]

It also wasn’t helping to sell Macs. Apple probably saw that the 1-2 punch of Photoshop and Lightroom was too formidable and not worth maintaining two photo editing apps. Photos was “good enough”. And I 100% disagree about Motion and FCP. Especially when FCP is so dependent on Motion and Apple sees entire businesses that are built on Motion to create plugins for FCP.

[@MarsViolet]

It's just that everybody I know who used to use FCP now uses DaVinci Resolve, and those plugin companies which used to make FCP plugins exclusively have branched out to also support Resolve. FCP is hemorrhaging users. But I hope I'm wrong.@@matthewTobrien

[@matthewTobrien]

For sure. Resolve is just too much value for a free app and many can deal with editing in a track-based system vs the magnetic timeline. I am not one of those people. And the one aspect of post-production I like the least... is color correction/grading. So I have ZERO interest in switching to Resolve. But yes, if Apple wants to maintain or grow its market share of higher end pro users, they need to innovate. They came out of the gate with a ton of innovation but it has been slooooooooow going for far too long.

[@garfishsmith9037]

Aperture was also much faster exporting Raws to JPEG on any given machine.

[@Jon-s8y]

I'm not sure I agree. Sure you can do it in camera, but you can also transform it afterwards into something new that connects with people. It's not only correcting and grading, you can take a colour image and change it into B&W and then dodge & burn into something completely new for example (see the B&W greats). Why apple axed aperture? most likey money as this is what MR Tim is very good at, not the creative stuff.

[@jeffchastain2977]

Exactly. If you think its all done in the camera, look up the work of the late Jerry Uelsman, or Jon Paul Capinegro.

[@joshmaday1462]

Man, I miss Aperture. For starters, I refuse to pay the Adobe toll troll. It's not going to happen. I have Affinity Photo, but making bulk edits across lots of photos is a lot more difficult there than it was in Aperture. Really, Aperture was more of a competitor to Lightroom. It was more about organizing photos (and now even several years into Apple Photos, the organization still isn't as robust as Aperture's was), and you could make more advanced edits than you could in a mere cataloguing utility like iPhoto (or even Photos today), and only have to resort to using something like Photoshop or Affinity if you wanted to do pretty advanced image manipulation. But I could do 99% of my editing without ever leaving Aperture. As a result of that added effort of having to manage workflow to make any edits beyond the basics, I find myself now just never retouching my photos unless I really need to (like, if I'm being paid for it, and even then, I find myself willing to put as much effort into it, in order to manage the mental overhead of round-trip editing, and manually managing adjustments across multiple images)

[@cdelrioc]

I´ll never forget Apple for that

[@martinvandenbroek2532]

The discontinuation of Aperture made me switch to Digikam on Linux (#OpenSUSE). The Apps on Linux might look a little less sleek and the learning curve is somewhat more steep, but the software is absolutely free of charge and the possibilities are equal if not better. Digikam has been around since 2011 and is still evolving. Never paying a dime to Apple ever again 😉

[@photobooksandrecords]

Aperture was awesome. I loved this app as a professional photographer.

[@philiptuths3747]

I’ll never trust Apple again after killing Aperture…..

[@NoobeyTunes]

I loved Aperture, it all clicked better than anything before or since. Sad that it lost to time.