what difference does it make how RAW supports gets added? apple has bundled RAW support with OS updates and as a stand-alone fix. it's two months since people started getting the D3/D300, more with the new Sony.

Aperture can't be billed as a pro application and now support new top of the line pro cameras faster than this. every other pro photo application has been updated, including some before the cameras were even shipping.

you keep repeating that patience is a virtue, and that is of course true. but wtf does that have to do with business?

While I don't expect camera models to be supported on the day of release, there is an expectation of a "professional" product to keep up with support for the flagship bodies of a leading manufacturer in a timely fashion. Other manufacturers were able to update their products in a reasonable amount of time, and without the resources or clout of an Apple, Inc. It feels as if this is has been the beginning of the end of Apple showing support for the photographic professional.

I have been a long time Aperture fan and have only dabbled in Lightroom occasionally.

Since purchasing my Nikon D300 I have no choice but to use Lightroom for my photos. Now that I have been using it I am really starting to like it and probably won't ever switch back to Aperture unless 2.0 blows away LightRoom. I wonder how many others like me their are out there? Apple are you listening?

I certainly understand that RAW releases wont follow immediately after release. It is also accurate that RAW support is system wide and apple has more of a burden as it is dealing with this at the OS level. Put the RAW support aside for a minute and focus on the application. Why is the support for the application so limited? I have been reading more about Lightroom updates from this board (aperture focused), then from any other source. Pro Applications, from a pure marketing standpoint, do and should get more scrutiny because they are viewed as business applications, hence why IBM, Microsoft, Oracle, etc. are doing fantastic. They understand that business systems and developing applications for business owners, SMB or enterprise, is a huge responsibility. If Apple is going to develop Professional grade, or business focused applications, they better be prepared to support them as such. OK, now back to RAW. I have been reading on the Macrumors site that there is a 10.5.2 seed for developers undergoing testing. I can only hope that apple has been waiting to include the RAW updates in this release, which is understandable. But if apple misses this window of opportunity, they will have for certain screwed the pooch as they say and we may be another 2-3 months waiting for latest RAW support. I think someone would do well writing a aperture to lightroom migration whitepaper........

It makes me wonder what sort of relationship Apple has with Nikon or vice versa. Being a Nikon shooter and Aperture user it makes me wonder if I should dump 1 or the other. Of course Nikon has Capture NX and I wonder if they would drag their feet working with Apple or is it all a Apple issue?

David King

It doesn't really matter to the end user how Apple provides camera updates. They really, really, really need to do it faster. Every day that goes by without D300 and D3 support erodes their user base. I don't even have one of these cameras, but as an Aperture fan, I find this dismaying. Fewer users means fewer dollars in the update and maintenance coffers--anyone can see this. Users don't give a rats whether the solution is "elegant" in the end, they need the tools when they need them, not 3 months later.

I second Mr. Furry. I've been forced into Lightroom/Bridge/CS3 for several months. My Aperture library is turning into a dusty archive of my pre-D300 photography.

The article points out that RAW support is part of the OS, and thus a full OS update is needed to support new formats, but the argument about this bringing general benefits is misguided. Speaking as PhD candidate in Software Engineering, I would like to state for the record that if it is truly the case that RAW support modules are deeply entwined with the OS, that is an extraordinarily stupid and unnecessary architecture. Just because it's "part of the OS" doesn't mean you can't have a plug-in style directory. Fast-changing things like RAW formats should be factored out and talk to the rest of the OS through a well defined API. Adding support for a new format should just be a matter of dropping a (possibly beta or 3rd party) file into the right directory.

What I'm curious about is whether the engineers actually have designed the system this poorly (even in Leopard!), or, following my prejudices, if some mouth-breathing moron in management or marketing is arguing that e.g., forcing pros to abandon Aperture for two months is worth it to ensure that new features are introduced at the PMA or something.

The damage is mostly done now. I have a new workflow, and I've stopped recommending Aperture to other folks. I would need more than a new version to go back, I think -- I would need an assurance that if I get a new camera body in the future I won't be left twisting in the wind for a couple of months.

Aperture is a "Professional" application?

Humm.

Lets see. The top professional models of Nikon and Canon do not
yet have RAW support in Aperture. For that matter, the Canon 1ds Mk II's
audio files are not supported either, and that camera is 3+ years old.

What is Apertures' most recently supported Canon RAW format, the 40D.

Apple, and others tout Aperture as Professional Application, but it all seems like marketing-speak to me.

I actually like Aperature. I use it for my wife's snapshots from her pocket camera. I would like to use it for my work also.

I'm encouraged by your optimism for Apple but I'm not on your side. Apple's dropped the ball on this one and are frustrating their customers and putting their market share at risk.

Whether it's an Aperture update or an OS update shouldn't matter one bit. Get them out in a timely manner and don't frustrate your customers.

On a related note, I think Aperture is missing a person like Scott Kelby to work both as an evangelist for Adobe and the voice of the customer. A few days back on his blog he raised the issue of wishes for Lightroom 2.0 and he was flooded with requests. Within 48 hours the Sr. Product Manager for Lightroom gives a response to both Mr. Kelby and Lightroom users in general.

I don't feel like we have the right person or persons in place to get our voices rallied, and we're definitely not hearing from Apple.

Who can be our voice back to Apple and Mr. Schorr?

It is just because I will need to buy a new software that I did not switch to lightroom. But I will if this week does not produce an update! I just need a fast and WORKING tool with Nikon D300. I do not care how and what they need to do.

Ditto the above. Where's my D3 support? I've long stopped using Aperture as the update cycle is woeful for a "pro" application.

I'm happy with PS and quite enjoying Lightroom too - In fact I don't see myself going back to Aperture anytime soon (and have found my learning curve with LR a lot faster to get through too - Adobe have made a very intuitive application there). I keep checking these web pages in hope of a surprise, but with less and less enthusiasm for Aperture. Shame, as I like all-things Apple, but Aperture has been quite a let down for me.

After 20 years I switched from Windows to Macs in 2007 mainly because of Aperture. Aperture and the Mac have greatly enhanced my workflow and my photography business.

I have over 80,000 images in Aperture but because I am now shooting Nikon D3's Aperture is no longer of any use. Apple has FORCED me to start using Lightroom.

Even after using Lightroom I still prefer Aperture BUT if Apple does not announce an update at the PMA show at the end of the month I have no choice but to dump Aperture and move on. :(

I've been waiting patiently (well, impatiently actually) for support for my Nikon D3. I am VERY frustrated, not only for the lack of support, but the lack of communication regarding such support. I totally understand that Apple has a policy of NEVER talking about new products/releases/features. But as others have mentioned above, this is supposed to be a "Pro" application for professionals. How can we make intelligent decisions without this information?

Also, as another poster mentioned above, there HAVE been RAW updates (well, at least one) in the past that were standalone, not tied to the OS update. Apple, why not release the RAW update when its ready and not keep us hanging with all the rest of the OS update issues.

Of course if 10.5.2 comes and goes without D3 support, then I'm really going to start wondering hard....

I use a Leica M8, and changed the raw.plist to use the D200 profile, why can't you do the same for the D300 or the D3?
I changed it because the profile shipped with 10.5 and 1.5.6 was not good, blown pinks made people look like they wore make-up.
The D200 profile is much cooler, and more true to life, which suits my kind of photography.

I have to agree with the basic sentiments of this thread. I have become a real fan of Aperture and it is was a central part of my workflow -until I bought a Canon G9. Now, I find I have to use Canon's software just to see my images. I was also going to upgrade my D70 to a D300 last month but then I noticed its RAW is not supported in Aperture.

Problem is, which am I going to forego? The D300 or Aperture? Well, I need the camera and I have an alternative with Lightroom so the software is going to have to go. I don't want to switch, but I also can't wait around for Apple to get their act together.

Its very frustrating because I do believe in Aperture and don't want to switch, but Apple is making it impossible for me to stay.

I especially agree with Scotty that Aperture needs an evangelist that can at least let us users feel that our requests are being heard...

I gotta agree with the D3 folks. I have a nice new Canon G9 with no support. I semi-manual point-n-shoot that shoots RAW. This is the pro photographer's point-n-shoot. came out like 4 months ago. no support yet.

Let's hope it's because apple is finishing up Aperture 2.0.

I'm also waiting for the RAW support of the canon 1Ds Mark III.
I have the camera now since mid of november and still no support.
2 months for a "pro" application to support a "pro" camera are a bit too much!
Also with the 1D Mark III it took more than a month, not really a record.
I' wondering how long we need to wait for the support of the 1Ds MIII and also for the new Nikon.
Perhaps I will need to start to have a look at Lightroom, Sigh!

I agree with Phil Gross that the raw support should be some kind of plug-in as you drop inside a folder.

I am surprised it isn't design like that. I guess Apple designers didn't understand the camera market and believed it was more standardized like the video market. Adobe DNG has now been adopted by the manufactures.

WHen they released the 1.5 Apple talked much about they had been listening to the customers. Why have they stopped listening?

THe raw support should be a minor update as would come as soon as the camera was released or earlier.

Apple has shown for decades they have not understood the companies need for computers and applications. Otherwise Windows would not dominate that market. Apple have dominated the publishing market and succeed to dominate the video market with Final Cut. The publisher need to be able to support old versions of the applications since customers use any different versions. The Videoproducers often has large projects as takes at least a month to finish often longer, of that reason they don't change the equipment very often and there is a delay. But Apple has not understood the photographers. Photographers are often one man band, many of them, and jumps much faster on new technology. The project time is shorter and it is not uncommon to use several different equipment at the same time for different purposes.

If Aperture 2.0 does not come at PMA and support for Nikon as well, I believe Apple will lose many customers - both current users and possible new ones.

There are two key issues here. There is a product problem with respect to RAW support of new cameras and it's been well described and discussed above.

The bigger and 2nd issue is that of communication. Apple is tight lipped and it generates many millions of dollars in PR and publicity. I get that.
With the pro market, an exception is needed. Adobe's model isn't perfect but it seems to work better. Adobe is communicating directly with their market (Tom Hogarty's blog, Terry White's demo of Elements 6 for Mac, and a number of other sources) and the support is growing for what I think is an inferior product.

Derrick Story seems to have a good relationship with Joe Schorr, and he's very well connected in the community. Maybe we can ask Derrick to take this message to Apple, work with us to ensure our voices are heard, and bring some positive change.

I think 2 things:

First (now this has changed since Tiger- for the better) RAW support for OS X resides in A) Core Image and B) /System/Library/Core Services/RawCamera.bundle

This 1 'folder' can easily be updated at any time w/o an OS update - we've actually had this happen before.
It tiger it was 1 set of things, but not as nice and fancy.

This also means we can add cameras on our own to - it's not great, but an acceptable short-term solution.

2: There IS ABSOLUTELY NO reason why the Aperture teams and core OS X dev teams cannot collaborate.
They can work together.

Also I know Apple like to get their decodes good the first time, but why can't they get access to all these cameras?
I'm sure the pro community would be willing to help.

Of course 10.5.2 is supposed to be on it's way - let's hope some raw support makes it in there!

The writing is on the wall....

Apple has dropped the ball and it will cost them.

Aperture 2.0 -if there is one -- better be a LR killer or they can kiss good bye the users they have left.

There is no excuse for a two month wait for camera raw support... what do they expect... that photographers stop working until Apple decides to support their cameras?

I am another Aperture user that was forced to switch to LR.

Hey, Apple... are you listening?

I'm afraid I find the whole situation ridiculous. As many in this thread have stated, Aperture is avertised as a professional product. Well - it doesn't support the latest professional cameras - ergo, it's not, currently at least, a professional product.

I really like Aperture - I still believe that, from a workflow standpoint, there is nothing to match it. But workflow means nothing if the cameras you use can't be included in that workflow. I have not used Aperture, more than for simply looking at some legacy images, for at least two months now. Instead I started using Capture NX simply to be able to gain access to my D3 and D300 NEFs. The shortcomings of NX are well documented and I have to agree with many of them. However, the more I have used it, the more I have come to like it, and the learning curve is not that great I have found. It's slow; the workflow is awful; but at the end of the day the final images produced can be stunning and I find the uPoint technology amazing and a great timesaver.

Once Apple get their act together and sort this fiasco, I will probably revert to using Aperture for importing, cataloging and output purposes, but will use NX for processing my selects. This demotes Aperture to being a piece of the workflow, rather than the central foundation of it; which rather defeats Apples intentions.

Two to three months to get RAW support for a mainstream pro camera is just not acceptable. And with the greatest respect to Dominique, I find the comment "patience is a virtue" to be patronising at best.

Well, what's to say at this point?...I'm an Olympus E3 user that waited four years for a new pro-level dslr to use with my lenses, so I AM patient. But, I'm also a businessman....its inconceivable to me that Apple would design, build and launch what is arguably the best RAW processing program on the planet, WITHOUT a streamlined plan to implement new RAW engines....or, maybe there was a change after the first release that caused this dilemma...we all have heard about some of the original design team being sacked...whatever. IF Apple is committed to Ap, they should 1) LISTEN to the constituency, 2) "grow-up" and quit playing mystery games with announcements - I would like to know what fiscal quarter to expect an update, and 3) have a formalized communication with their users. It would seem that a professional product deserves a professional means of support and implementation, including a dialog of discussion, rather than a ONE WAY blast of podcasts (tho I DO love those)..c'mon Apple!..if no 2.0 at PMA, I'm gone (like many of my colleagues).

cheers,
david

a Macaholic since 1987

On a related note, I think Aperture is missing a person like Scott Kelby to work both as an evangelist for Adobe and the voice of the customer. A few days back on his blog he raised the issue of wishes for Lightroom 2.0 and he was flooded with requests. Within 48 hours the Sr. Product Manager for Lightroom gives a response to both Mr. Kelby and Lightroom users in general.

Scotty, come visit our site, send us some comments. We talk to Apple constantly and are giving them feedback.

BTW, that post above was supposed to have quotation marks around the first part, which was a quote from scotty above. I guess when it says "you may use HTML tags for style" it doesn't mean you can use the quote tag. ;)

Anyhow, my point being that the Aperture Professional Users Network is the equivalent of NAPP on the platform, and we're talking to Apple all the time.

Sorry for the confusing post.

From Scott Kelby Blog:

"I met up with Lightroom Product Manager Tom Hogarty yesterday in the halls of Adobe HQ out in San Jose, California and when I stopped him to talk for two seconds between meetings, he had in his hands a stack of paper; it was a print out of all the ideas you guys posted as comments to my “Lightroom 2.0 Wishlist” blog post from last Friday.

Tom had emailed me a nice note just a few hours after I had released my wishlist post on Friday, but I was even more excited to see with my own eyes how seriously Adobe was taking your suggestions and ideas. I wasn’t at all surprised—just totally psyched! Tom did his own follow-up post last night on the Adobe “Lightroom Journal” Blog (Tips and advice straight from the Lightroom team) and you can read it right here.

Thanks to everyone who posted such great ideas here last week, and a special thanks to the entire Lightroom team at Adobe for their dedication to their customers and for working to make a truly great product even better."

I wish Apple would do the same. This shows that they are truly listening. Aperture people may be listening too, but their silence just give opportunity to their supporters to become disgruntled.

Apple, Are you listening?

Do we really think Apple cares about Aperture, really? You don't treat professionals like this, especially when there's other options out there. Time is money and their competitors are ahead and gaining distance. Apple could bring out the best interface there is, already have, but if the RAW processor falls short in quality or supported cameras to the tune of months . . . that costs professionals time and thus money.

As cosy as Apple can get with the music/movie industry, there's no way 10.4 or 10.5 should not be supporting the newest cameras on the day they hit the mail box.

Oh, and if you're waiting on LR 2.0 to come out before you roll out Aperture as a trump card, Apple, stop wasting my time.

I also nearly dropped Aperture for either LightRoom or C1 well it is free :)
However after a little surfing with Google I found the hack to change the raw.plist.

My issue was not a none support for the M8 but bad support, so the comments about apple waiting for good colour match is not true in my opinion.

I fixed it by simply pointing the Leica M8 entry to the Nikon D200.

So open why not try to back-up your raw.plist and then do a little hack? you will need to change the permission on the file to allow you to save it. Open /System/Library/CoreServices/RawCamera.bundle/Contents/Resources/Raw.plist with the Property List Editor and add an entry for your camera, and then the simplest option is to re-use an existing profile, like D200.

Good luck.

So Apple RAW support will most likely require an OS upgrade. Great.

How is it that Adobe can support the new Nikon RAW files BEFORE the bodies are even released and Apple is incapable of doing so?

Apple, if you're listening, it was wrong to call Aperture a "PROFESSIONAL" product and not support it as such. I suggest that you just rebrand it "iPhoto Deluxe" because that is all it is to me now.

Adobe has shown that it is committed to providing a professional product in Lightroom and I have made the switch. Now, wish me luck unloading that POS Aperture product on eBay.

Mind if I chime in?

I posted something similar to this on Apple's own forum, so I'll repeat it here. It is, of course, not Apple's policy to provide a public "ETA" on future releases, so I can't post anything like a timetable for when support for the newest RAW camera formats will become available.

But I can tell you this. We at Apple are ACUTELY aware of the pressing need to get support for the newest round of cameras into your hands as soon as possible. This is a top priority and is being given attention every day. We have members of our own team using these cameras, so you can imagine how interested we are in seeing this support integrated into the Mac OS and our photo applications!

So...we hear you. And we're on it. We fully intend to give our customers exactly what they need in this regard.

Thanks!

Joe Schorr
Sr. Product Line Manager, Photo Applications
Apple

Is Aperture dead?

Not even as much of a rumor of 2.0 and the stock heading south to $100/share from $200 at 12/31/07. Time to cut out niche products?

I hope not, but users will, of course, be the last to find out. Call it Apple's tight lipped policy or sheer arrogance - either way, time to plan ahead.

A piece on how to convert an Aperture library to Lightroom would be proactive, and most welcome, just in case.

It has all been said above and on many other sites.
I do not think Apple cares about the small number of Aperture users as they compare to iPods, iPhones and the other cooool products with their MASS MONEY markets. Aperture is a little niche product with limited market dollars and if Apple did not view it that way why do they keep developing iPhoto for the masses.
Adobe owns the market for digital photography post production, Adobe talks to its user base, Adobe products are a cult just as is Apple hardware is a cult but not Apple software,except Final Cut.
If Apple cared about their user base for Aperture they would talk to them and address the current status.
I have been using Adobe Lightroom so much lately that I would need to relearn Aperture if and when it reappears as a viable product.
Too bad it is was better solution.

Thanks Joe for stepping in.
I appreciate your efforts to calm the water and it's good to know that Apple is listening.
All I can say is - the sooner the better.

thanks to joe schorr for stopping by, but all due respect, the fact that a RAW support update is coming is no great surprise. apple would need to do this at some point whether aperture is dead or not.

"as soon as possible" is as empty a statement as the post's author's "patience is a virtue."

all other photo applications from adobe to bibble to lightzone to capture 1 and on and on have been updated. but it's not "possible" for apple?

no, it's just not a priority. very disappointing.

Hey all

As the director of the Aperture Users Professional Network (apertureprofessional.com) we'd like to remind everyone here that Apple does in fact listen to what people are saying.

On this blog, on the Apple forums, and especially though interaction with our group, Apple has been identifying issues important to the photographer.

We've taught Aperture to more than 1000 students since we launched our classes last May, and have signed up thousands of new members since our launch, and in that time we've passed along countless comments, requests, priorities and bits of feedback about the Aperture workflow and about photography in general. There's been a lot of informational flow here, and in the same way as Kelby chatted with Tom at Adobe. Except we haven't been just compiling information over the course of a week long survey on a website, we've been doing it for a year now.

While Apple is tight-lipped, the Aperture team is passionate about photography. And they're passionate about Aperture.

As Joe's comments suggest, Apple's working on it and we're glad to see that.

So, stick around. We think there are a lot of great things in store for Aperture users.

We also hope that you stop by ApertureProfessional.com and chat with us about your experiences, so that we can pass that along to Apple as well.

For weeks, I waited to use my Canon 40D with Aperture. I am still waiting to use my Canon G9 with Aperture after several months. In addition to these issues, Aperture also has several obvious bugs that have not been addressed since the newest version was released. Specifically, Referenced Images will show periodically as disconnected, and when you attempt to reconnect them, you will notice that the drive they reside on shows as off-line. For me this is my boot drive. The only way to correct this is to restart Aperture. Also, the Filmstip shows up randomly in views other than "Full".

I have also contemplated using LightRoom, but I am loyal to Apple hardware and software products. I have not been disappointed by either in the past. I am hoping this is the case for Aperture.

Thomas - "Not even as much of a rumor of 2.0 and the stock heading south to $100/share from $200 at 12/31/07. Time to cut out niche products?"

Apple just posted their highest quarterly profits in their entire history. Quite how the stock market translated that into a falling share price I don't know, but I suspect cutting out niche products isn't about to happen...

"Apple is listening"

Before Leopard I could download the log files from my Sony GPS but I could not use Canon 40D raw files.
Leopard does not recognize the Sony GPS at all, not even with Parallels, but can view Canon 40D raw files. I need to go to a PC with windows to get the GPS to work as a USB memory!

I cannot see other than that users have asked Apple and Garmin to make a product to the market as works. It is still not there. If Apple calls this "listening" and even erase the only way of geotagging the photos, I would like them to refrase to "Apple is listening and don't care."

This delay of raw support, is an indirect support to the king of the hill - Canon. It is just 2 of their five current raw cameras as is not supported. Well, it is also 2 of Nikons five raw cameras as is not supported, but it is their top models. If I would be Sony and Olympus I would be knocking on Apples door to help Apple to support their top models. Their sale is hurt by the lack of support from Apple. One of the reason I bought Canon cameras, instead of M8, was the support of the Canon cameras in Aperture. I am not satisfied with the Canon lenses for low light conditions, but their is no option - not Nikon, not Sony, not Olympus. Leica is supported today, but then I need to spend the same amount again, and not being satisfied of the high iso quality. Olympus and Pentax has some lenses as could be interesting, but there is still no support of Olympus and the high iso is not good enough on Pentax.

Apple how much do you get from Canon for the delay of the other cameras? Is the 1Ds3 and G9 a sacrifice to not make it to obvious?

It's all well and good to ask people to stick around and wait for an indeterminate period of time for the upgrades that may or may not deliver what we urgently need. I don't know when and I don't know what!

Like many others I now use a professional grade camera that is unsupported by OS-X and therefore Aperture. I take lots of photographs and need to use a professional tool to support this. Right now I have to use an alternative, in this case LR. As every day goes by I have more and more images in my LR catalog - which will cost me time and money to move into Aperture if and when it does support the 1Ds3.

I'm already liking LR very much indeed, so its starting to look like I no longer need Aperture and it would already cost me many hours of effort (and therefore money) to switch back. Clearly there's also my back catalog, but I can wait until it rains for a week to do the migration!

Apple's slow response is I believe doing Adobe a huge favor and rapidly increasing the number of LR users - it makes me wonder if this doesn't give Apple the cold they deserve for such poor treatment of their customers. Certainly if I treated my customers with such contempt I wouldn't have any customers! Pathetic and in my view Apple deserve a damn good kicking for this.

Real shame as I really liked Aperture.

Thanks Joe!

I think Apple has done a great job of listening to customers on Aperture feedback, but over the last year development seems to have slowed.

Joe, would Apple be able to change the way OS updates work - or so that the RAW bundle could be updated more easily? or Could a different "ProRAW" bundle be integrated into Aperture?

Or will Steve lighten up on the pro front and give us news.
------------------
Oh and Apple you have till PMA or many people leave Aperture. You've been warned. At least give an announcement of RAW support/2.0/1.6/1.5.7 or some beta stuff.

I would like to thank Joe Schorr for taking the time to post a response! It is reassuring to know that Apple is listening to Aperture users who are really frustrated with the long delay on providing RAW support for the Nikon D3/D300 cameras. Everyday without it is costing me time and money. Yes I knew that when I switched over to the new D3 I could expect a couple of week delay but I never considered it would be almost 2 months. I'm using LightRoom for my RAW shoots and I don't like it. I won't be switching. I am going to trust what Joe Schorr has told us and I'm going to wait it out and as it usually is with Apple it will be worth it. Let's hope that not only RAW support being hinted at by Joe but that Aperture 2.0 will make a showing at PMA.

Robert Capra

It's good that Apple are reading this comment (thanks Apple, good to hear). However I imagine folks at Adobe are too :)

My theory? Aperture, while a reasonable seller, is nowhere as profitable and importaant to Apple as things like AppleTV, The iPhone and movie rentals...

Resources have been allocated elsewhere since the iPhone's intro, which is about the same time we had a major update, and maybe just maybe, now we could get an update.

Apple's given us NO indication that their even working on this program. I am surprised especially after Macworld that no one managed to get even some verbal assurances from someone at Apple that things are being worked upon.

I am with the rest of the crowd, as much as I love the program, I am soon going to walk. When I buy the D3, I need to get work done.

Apple's given us NO indication that their even working on this program.

You did see the post from Joe Schorr, the product manager, further up this page, didn't you? Definitely a good month to six weeks later than it should have been, but we HAVE now been told that support is on the way.

The weird thing about the so called system-level raw support in OS X is that, at least where Leopard is concerned, there seems to be some sort of disconnect going on; that is, iPhoto '08 and Aperture are not using the same raw decoder version. I've documented it on this page and compared it to Lightroom's decoding:

http://web.mac.com/marsviolet/mark/raw.html

Aperture and iPhoto use the same raw converter. That doesn't mean that both programs do the same things with the data.

When you look at an image in Aperture (or lightroom for that matter) the images, unless you've turned off the "raw fine tuning" controls are already processed to some degree.

iPhoto's adjustment tools and Aperture's adjustment tools don't do the same things to the original raw files. So you can't just grab the exposure tool, for example, in one and drag it to the right and have the other program undergo the same processing by doing the same thing.

In other words, you're not really comparing the OS level raw deconvert, you're looking at what two programs are doing with that data, with two completely different sets of math handling the adjustments you're applying.

Joe, Dave - nice try. It's coming is a bunch of vapor ware. We shouldn't have to wait. It's already too late. Here's my suggestion: Sell Aperture to Adobe, let them roll in the best of it's features, port it to Windows as well. At least we, the photographers, will get what we need, when we need it.

Aperture and iPhoto use the same raw converter...In other words, you're not really comparing the OS level raw deconvert, you're looking at what two programs are doing with that data, with two completely different sets of math handling the adjustments you're applying.

Except that prior to Leopard and/or iLife '08, raw files looked identical in iPhoto and Aperture on my system, pre-adjustments. Now they're very different. Look at the way the dark areas in the Aperture image are being clipped to black prematurely. It used to be like that in iPhoto and Preview too. Now, in Leopard, the shadows do not clip in iPhoto and Preview, but they still do in Aperture.

The point being that, inexplicably, iPhoto and Preview are decoding my raw files better than Aperture. Way better. In Aperture the clipped blacks cannot be resolved. In iPhoto and Preview — on Leopard — the problem has resolved itself.

If you're on Leopard and have iLife '08, try it for yourself. Download the raw file linked to my page and have a go at it. Pay close attention to how the shadow areas clip to full black in Aperture and how there's no way to correct it, and how in iPhoto the problem doesn't exist at all.

In Leopard, Aperture is clearly still using the old pre-Leopard decoder, while iPhoto and Preview are using a newer, much better one.

You did see the post from Joe Schorr, the product manager, further up this page, didn't you?

He didn't actually say anything about a new version of Aperture. He only said that he knows people need more camera support and that they're working on adding more camera support. He didn't use the word "Aperture" at all in his post. It's not even in his signature. It's as if Aperture doesn't exist anymore.

Count me in as another frustrated Aperture user. Not only Nikon and Canon folks need help. What about support for the Ricoh line -- especially the GX100, a gem of a camera if there ever was one. Soft reassurances from Schorr saying they are working on it are not helpful. We need a statement from Apple promising support for a specific list of cameras by a certain date. And a further statement clarifying their future plans for Aperture. I go back a long way with Apple, and I have still not recovered from what they did to me by dropping hypercard. Thousands of hours of work down the drain. I am very much worried that they will play all of us Aperture users for the same kind of suckers.

I'm abut to drop Aperture permanently - -I have tried LR and Aperture. I much prefer Aperture but it must support my D3 ASAP. Loyal Apple user (from 1984) ready to go to LR.

Ok, all this talk about the OS being the one responsible for RAW support in applications is BS. 10.5.2 did in fact add RAW support for all the new DSLR's in question here and on other forums, but alas, Aperture is STILL NOT WORKING with these formats. iPhoto, Preview, and every other Application that handles RAW files now work except Aperture. Thanks Apple. Got my hopes up for nothing.