PDA

View Full Version : iPhoto vs. Aperture vs. iView




sebpayne
Dec 15, 2005, 04:48 PM
I'm currently trying to improve my abismal photography skills and I started looking at the software I am using.

At the moment, I import photos by hand, use a programme called ExifRenamer to rename the photos by DD_MM_YY-HH-MM.jpg (I think) and then import them into iPhoto. After that, I add comments and either store them, print them or then open up RapidWeaver and export them to web.

As I student, I can get Aperture at a discount but I will have to hack it as I only have a Mac Mini so spending £218 and then it not being offically supported seems a bit wrong but I have seen it working on Mac Mini and it looks a classy programme and I love the the web gallery/journal stuff.

iView Media Pro is a mid-way alternative which looks over complicated to me in the demo and I like Apple's way-of-doing-things. So the question is:

a.) Should I stick with iPhoto as an amateur photographer?
b.) Should I upgrade to Aperture?
c.) Should I move away from RapidWeaver (which requires iPhoto for web galleries) to something else (also in this post: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=1982008#post1982008)

All suggests will be recieved gracefully!

Seb



iGary
Dec 15, 2005, 04:50 PM
I'm currently trying to improve my abismal photography skills and I started looking at the software I am using.

At the moment, I import photos by hand, use a programme called ExifRenamer to rename the photos by DD_MM_YY-HH-MM.jpg (I think) and then import them into iPhoto. After that, I add comments and either store them, print them or then open up RapidWeaver and export them to web.

As I student, I can get Aperture at a discount but I will have to hack it as I only have a Mac Mini so spending £218 and then it not being offically supported seems a bit wrong but I have seen it working on Mac Mini and it looks a classy programme and I love the the web gallery/journal stuff.

iView Media Pro is a mid-way alternative which looks over complicated to me in the demo and I like Apple's way-of-doing-things. So the question is:

a.) Should I stick with iPhoto as an amateur photographer?
b.) Should I upgrade to Aperture?
c.) Should I move away from RapidWeaver (which requires iPhoto for web galleries) to something else (also in this post: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=1982008#post1982008)

All suggests will be recieved gracefully!

Seb

a) Yes.
b) Hell no.
c) No.

sebpayne
Dec 15, 2005, 04:54 PM
Any reasons behind those opinions? Because you like my site?

Seb

iGary
Dec 15, 2005, 04:55 PM
Aperture would be miserable to use on a mini.

Tons of free web gallery apps out there.

sebpayne
Dec 15, 2005, 04:59 PM
What about iView Media Pro? I am aware of a lot of gallery software such as Gallery2 and Coppermine but would it better to stick with RapidWeaver?

Thanks Again

Seb

iGary
Dec 15, 2005, 05:05 PM
What about iView Media Pro? I am aware of a lot of gallery software such as Gallery2 and Coppermine but would it better to stick with RapidWeaver?

Thanks Again

Seb

Haven't used iView, but a lot of people like it. :o

Glenn Wolsey
Jan 9, 2006, 11:49 PM
iGary, what do you use to organize your digital images?

e≤Studios
Jan 10, 2006, 08:56 AM
Aperture would be miserable to use on a mini.

Tons of free web gallery apps out there.


Apeture wont work on a mini anyhow, when you run the hardware checker it will fail on the video card and tell you that it is not compatible :)

http://www.apple.com/aperture/binary/Aperture_Checker.dmg

Ed

cwr
Jan 11, 2006, 10:29 PM
i was in the same boat not too long ago

I had about 8GB of photos in iPhoto and it was just becoming unusable (iBook G4, 1.2GHz, 1GB RAM). i have a friend who does photography for a living and he put me onto iView Media Pro, and i can say i haven't looked back. once you get used to its way of doing things (catalog sets are the equiv of iphoto's albums etc) then its good to go, and you can buy a copy of PictureSync for $14USD, which takes care of the uploading to a website (flickr, gallery etc..)

ChrisA
Jan 12, 2006, 06:17 PM
I'm currently trying to improve my abismal photography skills and I started looking at the software I am using.

Seb

What is it you want to improve? Your "photography" or are you looking to improve your post production workflow? One is an artistic issue the other technical.

I'd take a serious look at the new iPhoto 6. It fixes a serious flaw in iPhoto 5. "5" keeps metadata from the camera image files in the library index. This was a dumb design oversight on Apple's part that is now crrected. What the folks at Apple disn't know, I guess is that some cameras have huge metadata sections making the index huge. Scrolling in iPhoto requires reading the index front to back ... Moot issue now as "6" is released

sebpayne
Jan 18, 2006, 09:13 AM
Well, a lot has happened since I started this post :-). I have tried Lightroom but it is no good (at this point) to use full-time. I have purchased iView Media Pro 3 and was content using it until iPhoto 6 came out. I have installed iPhoto 6 and like it too much ;-). The full screen editing looks good on any Mac and is very usable. Anyway, my workflow is RAW-based but my camera is not compatible with Apple's Core Image so it doesn't work with any iPhoto.

I am being stupid or is there no way to add IPTC data (such as in IVMP) to photos in iPhoto like URL or copyright notice? Anyway, my workflow goes something like this (if I use iPhoto):

1. RAW photos are copeid to RAW-In folder on Desktop
2. RAW photos are processed by ACR in Photoshop CS2
3. RAW photos are exported as both DNG and JPEG
4. DNG files are backed up to DVD-R for storage
5. JPEG files are improted into iPhoto, tagged and commented
6. Any final adjustments are made
7. Files are either printed, uploaded to smugmug or just stored.
8. iPhoto Library synced to iBook

However, if I use iView:

1. RAW photos are copied to /Users/Seb/Photo Library/MM-YYYY {Shoot-Name}/
2. Imported in Master-Catalogue.ivc
3. Opened with Camera RAW and adjustments are made - saved out as DNG
4. Files are tagged with IPTC metadeta
5. Files are backed up to DVD
6. Files are converted to JPEG for upload to smugmug or printed
7. Folder + Master Catalogue are copied to iBook

So, how is this workflow then? And what would anyone recommend - iPhoto or iView? I am a 'serious ameteur' photographer with a growing library of about 1,500 photos (500 of them from Q4 last year!).

Thanks

Seb

jared_kipe
Jan 18, 2006, 09:52 AM
I love aperture, but you should have a dual G5 or so to use it well. Here's to hoping my new 20" intel mac will run her OK once it's universal binary.

DavidLeblond
Jan 18, 2006, 12:51 PM
I love Gallery2. You can get a plugin so you can export to it from iPhoto. Makes posting my photos hella easy.

javiercr
Jan 18, 2006, 05:34 PM
Abobe Lightroom beta is (imho) better that Aperture in many things if you are using RAW..mainly hardware requirements...and the beta is free until July.

amin
Jan 18, 2006, 07:29 PM
I use iPhoto for most basic photo stuff including publishing family web photo galleries. For RAW processing, the best I have found is Capture One (C1). They have trial and also sell a limited edition for $99 that suits my needs well. I am tempted to try Aperture though. I assume it would crawl on my 1.5GHz Rev D 15" G4 Powerbook, no?

Bern
Jan 19, 2006, 01:38 AM
For holiday snaps and quick family photos I use iPhoto, but for the artistic shots I use Adobe Bridge/Photoshop CS2. It's a good combination for me.

caveman_uk
Jan 19, 2006, 03:23 AM
I'm currently trying to improve my abismal photography skills and I started looking at the software I am using.

Having the latest greatest software doesn't make you a better photographer (neither does having a really expensive camera). It makes life easier after the event but if you still take rubbish photos it's benefit is still rather moot. Maybe reading about composition would be more useful.

Wes Jordan
Jan 20, 2006, 10:06 PM
Having the latest greatest software doesn't make you a better photographer (neither does having a really expensive camera). It makes life easier after the event but if you still take rubbish photos it's benefit is still rather moot. Maybe reading about composition would be more useful.

The camera doesn't matter...really? I just got back from a soccer game and half my shots are no good because of noise. I miss so many shots because of the shot-to-shot time resulting from the flash recharge mainly. A good camera helps...A LOT. I would rather trade up to a D-SLR than to buy aperture or something else.