Apple Photos vs Adobe Lightroom, the eternal dilemma.

[Angus Gibbins]

Actually, the Pro versions of the Macphun software do work as plugins; although you aren't getting all of the Pro features when you use them as plugins, you do when using them as standalone programs.

Plugins or Photos Extensions?

 

[Angus Gibbins]

I have Intensify CC and Tonality CC and they work wonderfully with Apple Photos. I would disagree that Lightroom is the only way to make your photos pop. I was a Lightroom user for years, I also used aperture, Capture One Pro 9 and with the exception of Lightroom's abysmal processing of Fuji RAW files they are not all that far apart. What LR has in additional tools, Photos makes up for in leveraging the Mac OS and iOS. I am currently a Capture One Pro user and I have been seriously thinking about switching TO Apple Photos for its organization, ease of use and the fact that it gives me some very nice options for sharing between my Macs and devices. It's pretty good with RAW and using Tonality CC (I am mostly interested in BW) I think it's a pretty powerful tool. FWIW I much prefer Tonality to Silver Efex Pro 2.

Cheers. I'll check them out. I didn't mean to imply that LR is the only way, what I meant was Photos editing tools doesn't even compare to LR. I know there's other tools out there. But LR's arguable the most dominant.

 

[dixeyk]

Cheers. I'll check them out. I didn't mean to imply that LR is the only way, what I meant was Photos editing tools doesn't even compare to LR. I know there's other tools out there. But LR's arguable the most dominant.

I knew what you meant. I think Photos' tools are good but not as comprehensive as LR. I resist calling LR dominant as I really think it's a pretty pedestrian tool for the most part. My current tool Capture One Pro 9 has a tool set are even more comprehensive than LR (it also has a better RAW converter) yet I probably don't use more than a few of the tools on a regular basis. With that in mind any of these tools would give me what I need (including Photos) of course you will know better than any of us what will work for you.

 

[Lcrunyon]

Plugins or Photos Extensions?

Extensions, sorry.

 

[ijm5012]

Hmm... so if one were to purchase the "Pro" version directly from Macphun's website, you get the standalone software, the availability to use it as a plug-in for LR, PS, Aperture, and also the availability to use it as a extension to Apple Photos, correct?

I might have to at least give it a try.

Does anyone know, in any of their software, is there the ability to stitch panoramas, or use features in LR like the graduated ND filter, radial filter, brushes, etc.? I use those features quite a bit in LR, especially when working with HDR panorama images, and it's really quite nice to have everything available all within a single program?

Speaking of that, can one open the raw file in Photos, and then run it through the various extensions still as a RAW file, or does it force you to save it as a JPEG when exiting the first extension?

 

[mcasan]

When you are in LR and you want to send the image to a plugin, you get the choice to send the image with or without the changes you may have made in LR. The Macphun set does not do pano merge. Aurora does exposure merging of a bracketed set of images. It also works on a single image. There are lots of educational videos available from Macphun on Aurora and on the Creative Kit which a package of the other apps.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[ijm5012]

That's a real bummer that they don't have something that will stitch. A lot of my panorama shots are HDR pano's, where I'll take typically 3 exposures covering 5EV for each one of the "panel" images, which I'll then stitch together and edit the entire image.

That's one of the things that is really great about LR6, is the ability to do pano's & HDR all within LR. It definitely reduces the number of steps in my workflow, but I agree, it would be great to have the function of LR with the tie to Photos/iOS/OSX.

 

[ijm5012]

You could use Photoshop Express for layering and stitching. It plays nicer with Photos.app than Lightroom does. I'm still on Lightroom 5, and Photoshop Express handles my panorama stitching needs well.

The big picture here is that in the next year or two Photos.app and 3rd party add-ons will get better at processing images. I’m sure of that. And during that time Lightroom plus third party add-ons will get better at sharing? I’m not sure of that at all.

For example, I just read about an HDR app that just added Photos support:
Aurora HDR for Mac gets its own Photos extension

The problem with use PSE is that once it's stitched, I have to save it as a JPEG or TIFF, and I lose a lot of the data that's there in the RAW file.

With LR, my work flow for HDR Pano's typically consists of merging each of the HDR images together in to their individual "panels", and then taking those HDR "panels" and stitching them together. The nice thing about this is that at this point, I still have a RAW image to work with, and any changes I make are made to the entire image (compared to a single HDR panel only).

I previously would merge in Photoshop Elements, but when exporting from Elements, it's no longer a RAW file, so I lose a lot of the latitude I had to process the image.

Like you said, over time the extensions for Photos will develop and I'm sure this will be possible. Adobe have six revisions to implement this functionality in LR6, so it'll come in time with Photos.

One thing I am surprised about is that Macphun did not incorporate this feature in to Aurora HDR. It seems like a no-brainer for me, to be able to merge your HDR images and stitch them together all from within a single program.

 

[dixeyk]

Apple makes Photos.app for 80 to 90 percent of Mac and iPhone users who take pictures, including all beginners. Clearly, you are not one of those people. You are in the top 1 percent of camera software users. Basically, Apple does not care about what you want in Photos.app.

Apple doesn’t care about what I want either.

So one question for the original poster to think about is does Apple want to take care of him? Where does he fit in on the spectrum now, and where will he fit in the next few years.

I also don't expect Olympus, Panasonic, Sony or Fuji to care either. They market what they have to certain user bases and if you fall into that group then great and if not then your gotta make do or look elsewhere. It seems like the OP probably falls into the target market for tools like LR or C1 based on what they want. Photos is oriented toward casual photography (including phones) with a special emphasis on working well within the Apple ecosystem (which makes sense), of course, it is precisely that integration with the OSX and iOS that makes Photos interesting. FWIW I think I could move from C1 to Photos without missing too much but that's because I tend to be pretty minimalist anyway when it comes to PP.

 

[Lcrunyon]

Hmm... so if one were to purchase the "Pro" version directly from Macphun's website, you get the standalone software, the availability to use it as a plug-in for LR, PS, Aperture, and also the availability to use it as a extension to Apple Photos, correct?

I might have to at least give it a try.

Does anyone know, in any of their software, is there the ability to stitch panoramas, or use features in LR like the graduated ND filter, radial filter, brushes, etc.? I use those features quite a bit in LR, especially when working with HDR panorama images, and it's really quite nice to have everything available all within a single program?

Speaking of that, can one open the raw file in Photos, and then run it through the various extensions still as a RAW file, or does it force you to save it as a JPEG when exiting the first extension?

That is the way Macphun works with Photos. I don't know about PS or LR.

There is another thread on the Photos extensions that might answer some of your other questions. While there is one program with filters, I am not aware of any that mimic a graduated ND filter.

Edit: I fixed the link.

 

[mcasan]

They work hard at improving those tools.

Certainly not in the case of Aperture or iPhoto. Those products were tossed into the weeds. The Aperture users were left to to use as a replacement DAM. Photos isn't an Aperture replacement by any means.

If all you want to do is casual jpg snapshots from IOS devices, Photos and the available extensions should be good enough. If you want to invest time and money in dedicated camera systems to create higher quality and more artistic images, then you likely need a DAM such as Lightroom or Capture One Pro. With Lightroom you can do round trips to plugins (Photoshop, Macphun apps, Nik apps, On1 apps..etc.) and do a return to LR. With Capture One Pro you do not get an integrated round trip.

 

[dixeyk]

Certainly not in the case of Aperture or iPhoto. Those products were tossed into the weeds. The Aperture users were left to to use as a replacement DAM. Photos isn't an Aperture replacement by any means.

If all you want to do is casual jpg snapshots from IOS devices, Photos and the available extensions should be good enough. If you want to invest time and money in dedicated camera systems to create higher quality and more artistic images, then you likely need a DAM such as Lightroom or Capture One Pro. With Lightroom you can do round trips to plugins (Photoshop, Macphun apps, Nik apps, On1 apps..etc.) and do a return to LR. With Capture One Pro you do not get an integrated round trip.

Capture One Pro does give you round trip with the Nik plug-ins (and others) but not the Macphun apps.

 

[Angus Gibbins]

You could use Photoshop Express for layering and stitching. It plays nicer with Photos.app than Lightroom does. I'm still on Lightroom 5, and Photoshop Express handles my panorama stitching needs well.

The big picture here is that in the next year or two Photos.app and 3rd party add-ons will get better at processing images. I’m sure of that. And during that time Lightroom plus third party add-ons will get better at sharing? I’m not sure of that at all.

For example, I just read about an HDR app that just added Photos support:
Aurora HDR for Mac gets its own Photos extension

I bought AuroraHDR Pro about a week ago. I looked at AuroraHDR and asked their support. All the extension does is open a single image out of Photos into AuroraHDR, and then back into Photos once saved. Not really in the spirit of why Apple built Photos to support extensions.

 

[Angus Gibbins]

Lot of discussion here about what Apple's intentions here with Photos are too.

Don't forget they did a similar thing with Final Cut Pro and pretty much cemented Adobe Premiere Pro as the defecto standard in professional video editing.

I think I'm going to concede defeat with this one and just use Lightroom from now on. Apple has a habit of letting technologies fall by the wayside over time (look at iTunes.). I can't afford to let that happen with my photography and design stuff. It's not my main jobby job but I'm doing more and more of our on the side and it's too important to trust Apple to let go on the wayside.

 

[Lcrunyon]

I bought AuroraHDR Pro about a week ago. I looked at AuroraHDR and asked their support. All the extension does is open a single image out of Photos into AuroraHDR, and then back into Photos once saved. Not really in the spirit of why Apple built Photos to support extensions.

Yes. As I explained earlier, Photos cannot do anything that requires working with multiple frames, which includes HDR, so Aurora is not an extension for Photos. Macphun is hoping that will change, but I have not heard anything to suggest that it will.

The Macphun software that can be used as extensions are Noiseless, Tonality, Snapheal, Intensify, and FX Photo Studio.

 

[Lcrunyon]

just realized I had the wrong thread link earlier. Now fixed.

 

[David A]

Lot of discussion here about what Apple's intentions here with Photos are too.

Don't forget they did a similar thing with Final Cut Pro and pretty much cemented Adobe Premiere Pro as the defecto standard in professional video editing…

I tend to agree. I swapped from Aperture to LR a bit over 3 years ago because Aperture was getting no further real development and was falling behind.

I have no idea about Apple's intentions but I do think that there seems to be a processing divide developing between products intended for "snap shooters" and products intended for professional processing needs. On the "snap shooter" side you find basic adjustments for things like exposure, contrast, highlights, shadows, basic sharpening and noise reduction, and lots of things based around presets for particular looks. On the professional processing side you find more flexible adjustments for the basics plus the ability to do local as well as global adjustments. My feeling is that Apple is abandoning the professional side. It's a relatively small market compared to the market for "snap shooter" products and it takes a lot more development work for a market that isn't growing strongly. Opening Photos up for other developers to create extension products was a good idea but the people who are developing extension products are all people who are developing products for the professional market and they may not see Photos extensions as adding much to their bottom line, especially since most of the people who would be the market for extensions are probably already using professional level products anyway.

I think that divide between 2 groups of processing software is going to deepen over time. I think those people who are happy with Photos at present may become even happier with it over time but I also think that those who aren't satisfied with it's capabilities at present are going to end up moving to professional processing software in order to get what they want that Photos does not provide and the more people who make that decision, the less reason there is for a developer to try and develop an extension product for Photos. It's becoming a black and white world in which not enough people are in love with the thought of a mid-grey option.

 

[dornblaser]

I think I'm going to concede defeat with this one and just use Lightroom from now on. Apple has a habit of letting technologies fall by the wayside over time (look at iTunes.). I can't afford to let that happen with my photography and design stuff. It's not my main jobby job but I'm doing more and more of our on the side and it's too important to trust Apple to let go on the wayside.

I am going the same route, using Photos mainly to sync pictures and to share with my wife.

 

[Angus Gibbins]

I tend to agree. I swapped from Aperture to LR a bit over 3 years ago because Aperture was getting no further real development and was falling behind.

I have no idea about Apple's intentions but I do think that there seems to be a processing divide developing between products intended for "snap shooters" and products intended for professional processing needs. On the "snap shooter" side you find basic adjustments for things like exposure, contrast, highlights, shadows, basic sharpening and noise reduction, and lots of things based around presets for particular looks. On the professional processing side you find more flexible adjustments for the basics plus the ability to do local as well as global adjustments. My feeling is that Apple is abandoning the professional side. It's a relatively small market compared to the market for "snap shooter" products and it takes a lot more development work for a market that isn't growing strongly. Opening Photos up for other developers to create extension products was a good idea but the people who are developing extension products are all people who are developing products for the professional market and they may not see Photos extensions as adding much to their bottom line, especially since most of the people who would be the market for extensions are probably already using professional level products anyway.

Agreed. I think this is the problem. Apple had built a really good framework for developers to beef up photos.

Long term is there enough incentive for developers to do this? And will the framework continue to be good in the future?

 

[mcasan]

Only being able to send one image to plugin is a serious limit in Apple's design of Extensions. If you use Photos and want want to use Aurora on a bracketed set of images, you will have to export them to the desktop and them drag them into Aurora. Once the HDR image is ready, it will have to be imported into Photos.

One of many reasons I stick with LR.