Aperture vs. Lightroom - Page 4 - MacRumors Forums
Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Special Interests > Visual Media > Digital Photography

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Jul 7, 2011, 04:19 PM   #76
SalsaShark
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Pardon the neglected blog, but here's my take on Lightroom 3:

http://age.posterous.com/lightroom-3...a-bag-of-chips

I've been using LR since day 1 and absolutely love it. LR3 really blew me away. Every time a new version of Aperture comes out, I jump on the 30 day trial and really try to like it. Invariably, I just can't. In my eyes, it's a completely inferior product, and the RAW processing engine in LR3 (and CS5) puts Adobe in a league of their own (aside from Nikon's, but there's just no workflow in NX Capture). It's too bad, because some respectable competition would only help improve Lightroom, not that there's a lot I can think to improve on.

A few years ago, I'd say the split among my photographer colleagues was near 50/50, but the Aperture hangers-on eventually caved, almost to a man. I'd say it's over 90% LR these days and I really don't understand how the Aperture users persist.
SalsaShark is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2011, 06:59 PM   #77
MattSepeta
macrumors 65816
 
MattSepeta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: 375th St. Y
Send a message via AIM to MattSepeta
Quote:
Originally Posted by SalsaShark View Post

A few years ago, I'd say the split among my photographer colleagues was near 50/50, but the Aperture hangers-on eventually caved, almost to a man. I'd say it's over 90% LR these days and I really don't understand how the Aperture users persist.
Couldn't agree with you more. I have been with Aperture since 1, and I tried out the LR3 trial a month or so ago. It blew me away. WAY faster than A3. WAY faster. I also fell in love with the noise reduction.

However- After getting towards the end of my first wedding through it, about 800/1200 photos processed, I started to notice how fake and plasticy the NR made the skintones. BAM. All of a sudden, I did a few exports against the same image with similar settings from Aperture 3, and the A3 ones looked much more natural in my eye. Not to mention the absurdity of the "Module" system, IMO.

I felt like I was fighting it the entire time. I came to the conclusion that I could not afford to learn a new system mid-"season". I do plan on giving it another go (somehow... register a new adobe account to try it again?) this winter, as Aperture 3 is the slowest and least responsive "pro" software I have ever used....

Although I am inches away from my new iMac so that might turn Aperture 3 into a whole new beast (27" 2.9ghz i7 16GBRAM 2tbHDD+Intel X25SSD). I like almost everything about aperture 3 other than how slow it is, which is borderline unacceptable IMO.
__________________
busy, busy busy.
MattSepeta is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 8, 2011, 09:40 AM   #78
SalsaShark
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
OK, I'll give you that the modules are kind of clunky, but I generally only spend time in Library and Develop so I deal with it. Batch captioning is also severely lacking, but I've come up with my own workaround that works well enough (and planning on writing up a post about how to do it soon). I guess I haven't dealt with skintone much since I tend to shoot cars.

Being up against daily deadlines when shooting and having to deal with thousands of photos each day, speed is very, very high on my priority list and because of that Aperture isn't even an option. And the lens profiles in LR3 are just amazing. One-click CA, vignetting, and distortion correction? Yes, please.

Edit: So you're ok with the color processing in Aperture? I've never felt like Apple's RAW engine handles colors well. Adobe's colors are much, much closer to what you get from Apple's.
SalsaShark is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 8, 2011, 09:50 AM   #79
Digital Skunk
macrumors 604
 
Digital Skunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: In my imagination
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattSepeta View Post
Couldn't agree with you more. I have been with Aperture since 1, and I tried out the LR3 trial a month or so ago. It blew me away. WAY faster than A3. WAY faster. I also fell in love with the noise reduction.

However- After getting towards the end of my first wedding through it, about 800/1200 photos processed, I started to notice how fake and plasticy the NR made the skintones. BAM. All of a sudden, I did a few exports against the same image with similar settings from Aperture 3, and the A3 ones looked much more natural in my eye. Not to mention the absurdity of the "Module" system, IMO.

I felt like I was fighting it the entire time. I came to the conclusion that I could not afford to learn a new system mid-"season". I do plan on giving it another go (somehow... register a new adobe account to try it again?) this winter, as Aperture 3 is the slowest and least responsive "pro" software I have ever used....

Although I am inches away from my new iMac so that might turn Aperture 3 into a whole new beast (27" 2.9ghz i7 16GBRAM 2tbHDD+Intel X25SSD). I like almost everything about aperture 3 other than how slow it is, which is borderline unacceptable IMO.
I agree with this 100%, especially the ridiculous module system in LR. I've been a user and lover of LR since the first Beta all those years ago. I've never like the module system. Aperture finds a way to give you all of the tools you need in a clean UI package that you can bring up whenever wherever.

The other biggest strength is the integration with the other apps . . . if you use any of the other Apple apps it's a little plus.

Ap3 isn't a hog on my 5 year old laptop, but most of my images are referenced and are stored on a Drobo S with eSATA. Ap3 will slow your system to a crawl if your disks aren't fast enough and you're having Aperture manage your images.

Personally, I've learned them both and love them both, they have their plusses and minuses. I've gotten free copies of Aperture for a while now, and buy LR when I need it. I haven't bought LR3 however since Aperture 3 does all that I need, and I don't bother doing any serious post work in LR or AP . . . Photoshop is still where I'll take my RAWs in a heartbeat.
__________________
What do I have?, stuff that I actually use for work! Some old, some new, all effective.
Digital Skunk is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 14, 2011, 03:39 AM   #80
iSimx
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digital Skunk View Post

Personally, I've learned them both and love them both, they have their plusses and minuses. I've gotten free copies of Aperture for a while now, and buy LR when I need it. I haven't bought LR3 however since Aperture 3 does all that I need, and I don't bother doing any serious post work in LR or AP . . . Photoshop is still where I'll take my RAWs in a heartbeat.

Am I right in saying Aperture doesn't handle layers from photoshop very well?

I want to like Aperture given the fact that the UI is great and has what I need for my workflow but on my late 2008 MBP it's just so laggy compared to Lightroom. Has the latest update improved performance?
iSimx is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 14, 2011, 07:56 AM   #81
Digital Skunk
macrumors 604
 
Digital Skunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: In my imagination
Quote:
Originally Posted by iSimx View Post
Am I right in saying Aperture doesn't handle layers from photoshop very well?

I want to like Aperture given the fact that the UI is great and has what I need for my workflow but on my late 2008 MBP it's just so laggy compared to Lightroom. Has the latest update improved performance?
Aperture 2 ran smoothly on my 17" 2.5Ghz MBP from 2007 ONLY when the library was referenced.

I haven't changed too much of that workflow with Aperture 3, although I do have about 5000 images being managed by Aperture on a work Mac Pro from 2006 and it hasn't had a hiccup.

I am not too sure about PS layers in Aperture since I don't use them in my workflow. Most of my adjustments in PS involve the history brush.
__________________
What do I have?, stuff that I actually use for work! Some old, some new, all effective.
Digital Skunk is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 28, 2011, 01:22 AM   #82
calle73
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Im a recent convert from LR2 to A3 that i bought for a low price in the app store
I have always liked LR but I cant see myself going back after trying A3 for a few weeks
I prefer the adjustment tools and its so much easier to switch between library and adjustments in A3
Before i exported my photos to iPhoto and there i ordered photobooks etc. Now I can do everything in one program
calle73 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 28, 2011, 09:25 PM   #83
Digital Skunk
macrumors 604
 
Digital Skunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: In my imagination
Quote:
Originally Posted by calle73 View Post
Im a recent convert from LR2 to A3 that i bought for a low price in the app store
I have always liked LR but I cant see myself going back after trying A3 for a few weeks
I prefer the adjustment tools and its so much easier to switch between library and adjustments in A3
Before i exported my photos to iPhoto and there i ordered photobooks etc. Now I can do everything in one program
The real joy is that there isn't any switching between adjustments and the library. You can have them both up at the same time. Aperture's UI is just very open compared to LR3's
__________________
What do I have?, stuff that I actually use for work! Some old, some new, all effective.
Digital Skunk is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 13, 2011, 07:17 PM   #84
danpass
macrumors 68020
 
danpass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Miami, FL
I have my eye on Aperture out of the Mac App Store (just $80) but the reviews make me think that its not up to speed yet for Lion.

I've been using LR3.3 on W7Pro for a while now but have no specific attachment to it.
danpass is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 13, 2011, 11:13 PM   #85
Digital Skunk
macrumors 604
 
Digital Skunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: In my imagination
Quote:
Originally Posted by danpass View Post
I have my eye on Aperture out of the Mac App Store (just $80) but the reviews make me think that its not up to speed yet for Lion.

I've been using LR3.3 on W7Pro for a while now but have no specific attachment to it.
If it helps, I still use both LR and AP to do my own and client work. The biggest reasons I have for still choosing AP over LR for my library is that AP has that open UI and that AP talks to the other pro and "I" apps. Otherwise it's always going to be a toss up.
__________________
What do I have?, stuff that I actually use for work! Some old, some new, all effective.
Digital Skunk is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 20, 2011, 08:07 AM   #86
danpass
macrumors 68020
 
danpass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Miami, FL
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digital Skunk View Post
If it helps, I still use both LR and AP to do my own and client work. The biggest reasons I have for still choosing AP over LR for my library is that AP has that open UI and that AP talks to the other pro and "I" apps. Otherwise it's always going to be a toss up.
thanks. I installed the trial last night. It is pretty smooth though I only imported about 50 RAWs.

Can it reference a network library? The reviews make it seem that it used but no longer with Lion. I haven't tried it yet.
danpass is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2011, 05:52 PM   #87
firestarter
macrumors Demi-God
 
firestarter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Green and pleasant land
Adobe Lightroom half price in the UK Amazon store this week only.

I think it's an awesome app. I've evaluated Aperture - and find Lightroom a lot quicker and with better functionality.
firestarter is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2011, 06:23 PM   #88
maflynn
Moderator
 
maflynn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Boston
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digital Skunk View Post
If it helps, I still use both LR and AP to do my own and client work. The biggest reasons I have for still choosing AP over LR for my library is that AP has that open UI and that AP talks to the other pro and "I" apps. Otherwise it's always going to be a toss up.
That is a definitely a big plus for consumers who are well invested in apple's eco-system. I see apple making aperture less a professional product and more of a prosumer/consumer product. They're doing that with their other pro apps and we got a bit of that in aperture 3 with the addition of faces.

Sill, I like aperture, but I think LR has better editing tools so I've mostly switched over to LR. I've maintained my AP library in part because of the integration to other i-Apps as you mentioned it but my choice has been LR
__________________
~Mike Flynn
maflynn is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2011, 08:38 PM   #89
Digital Skunk
macrumors 604
 
Digital Skunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: In my imagination
Quote:
Originally Posted by maflynn View Post
That is a definitely a big plus for consumers who are well invested in apple's eco-system. I see apple making aperture less a professional product and more of a prosumer/consumer product. They're doing that with their other pro apps and we got a bit of that in aperture 3 with the addition of faces.

Sill, I like aperture, but I think LR has better editing tools so I've mostly switched over to LR. I've maintained my AP library in part because of the integration to other i-Apps as you mentioned it but my choice has been LR
I agree, I've seen this and I hate to say it but I do agree. I had to turn faces off the first moment I launched Ap. LR was a must because of collaborating with the other photogs I work with, and some peculiar clients have me shooting RAW, importing, and then just exporting and handing over a LR library with adjustments.

I haven't fallen in love with the adjustment tools from either Ap or Lr, so it's straight to PS for me when I do need to make adjustments.
__________________
What do I have?, stuff that I actually use for work! Some old, some new, all effective.
Digital Skunk is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 14, 2011, 09:16 AM   #90
radek42
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Here, there, and everywhere
Interesting.
I am looking into switching my photo hobby over to mac and deciding if to go with LR or Ap. I was leaning towards LR just for pure cross-platform compatibility; this will be my first mac after all :-)

So how do you (efficiently) maintain two parallel libraries? Is there a way to import LR library into Ap and vice versa?

Thanks, R>



Quote:
Originally Posted by Digital Skunk View Post
If it helps, I still use both LR and AP to do my own and client work. The biggest reasons I have for still choosing AP over LR for my library is that AP has that open UI and that AP talks to the other pro and "I" apps. Otherwise it's always going to be a toss up.
radek42 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 18, 2011, 09:32 AM   #91
TonyK
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: May 2009
Not that I know of. Each is different and their data structures are just different enough to make them incompatible. I don't use LR myself but I did play with it some prior to decided on Ap. My issue with LR was more a metaphor of navigating than anything else.

Both, at their heart, are image management systems. The editing features are suitable for quick fixes and the plug-ins help with more advanced editing. As I am not seeing myself moving back to Windows personally, Ap was a good choice for me.

Here is a link I found about moving from Ap to LR. Maybe it will help: http://www.cultofmac.com/19659/how-t...-to-lightroom/


Quote:
Originally Posted by radek42 View Post
Interesting.
I am looking into switching my photo hobby over to mac and deciding if to go with LR or Ap. I was leaning towards LR just for pure cross-platform compatibility; this will be my first mac after all :-)

So how do you (efficiently) maintain two parallel libraries? Is there a way to import LR library into Ap and vice versa?

Thanks, R>
TonyK is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 18, 2011, 09:44 AM   #92
danpass
macrumors 68020
 
danpass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Miami, FL
Quote:
Originally Posted by danpass View Post
thanks. I installed the trial last night. It is pretty smooth though I only imported about 50 RAWs.

Can it reference a network library? The reviews make it seem that it used but no longer with Lion. I haven't tried it yet.
I tried last night to import pics with the 'Store Files: In their current location' option and it worked.

But I have to reconnect the pics the each time that I open up Aperture. Quick to do (find one and then connect all) but a hassle nonetheless.
danpass is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Sep 19, 2011, 09:51 AM   #93
radek42
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Here, there, and everywhere
I figured both libraries won't be compatible ... I'll need to eventually test-drive both in order to decide.

The link deals with LR3-beta. Still, I found it hard to follow; mind you, I haven't really used either program for extended period of time (currently trying LR3 under Windows).

Cheers,
R>

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyK View Post
Not that I know of. Each is different and their data structures are just different enough to make them incompatible. I don't use LR myself but I did play with it some prior to decided on Ap. My issue with LR was more a metaphor of navigating than anything else.

Both, at their heart, are image management systems. The editing features are suitable for quick fixes and the plug-ins help with more advanced editing. As I am not seeing myself moving back to Windows personally, Ap was a good choice for me.

Here is a link I found about moving from Ap to LR. Maybe it will help: http://www.cultofmac.com/19659/how-t...-to-lightroom/
radek42 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 29, 2011, 04:40 PM   #94
Dornblaser
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Chicago-area
Since this thread was started in '08 and there are now new versions of both Aperture & Lightroom I thought that I would "bump" the thread. I just downloaded the trial version of Lightroom and I will do the same with Aperture. I have light photography needs, most personal but I do do website development. I use PhotoShop and Dreamweaver. I was wondering if anyone has new opinions about the new releases? I am leaning towards Aperture for my needs but I would appreciate comments and suggestions.
Dornblaser is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2011, 07:39 AM   #95
Digital Skunk
macrumors 604
 
Digital Skunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: In my imagination
Quote:
Originally Posted by radek42 View Post
Interesting.
I am looking into switching my photo hobby over to mac and deciding if to go with LR or Ap. I was leaning towards LR just for pure cross-platform compatibility; this will be my first mac after all :-)

So how do you (efficiently) maintain two parallel libraries? Is there a way to import LR library into Ap and vice versa?

Thanks, R>
Sorry for taking so long to reply, very good question and it does have a somewhat simple answer . . . if you are still looking for one after all these months.

The short answer is no, you can't import the actual library file into either app. The long answer is yes, you can import your own referenced file hierarchy into either and if I recall correctly Aperture now reads and exports EXIF data so your adjustments can be send to LR.

It's tedious and complicated even for me and I don't do too many adjustments in LR or AP. I do however keep most of my photos referenced (stuffed in files on a separate HDD. This allows me to point both apps to the files and see them concurrently. Both apps will generate preview which take up space, but that's a small caveat.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dornblaser View Post
Since this thread was started in '08 and there are now new versions of both Aperture & Lightroom I thought that I would "bump" the thread. I just downloaded the trial version of Lightroom and I will do the same with Aperture. I have light photography needs, most personal but I do do website development. I use PhotoShop and Dreamweaver. I was wondering if anyone has new opinions about the new releases? I am leaning towards Aperture for my needs but I would appreciate comments and suggestions.
The major consensus is that Lightroom is more for the working ProPhotog fellow and Aperture is more for the working ProMultimedia fellow. If it's a personal library (kids photos and vacations and what not) then its' a toss up.

Personal opinion, is that Aperture is a bit more connected to the consumer side of things, and has pro features that anyone would love. Lightroom is still the cat's meow with pro photogs all over, so if you plan on working with other photogs, or getting a job in a photo studio or journalism agency go LR.
__________________
What do I have?, stuff that I actually use for work! Some old, some new, all effective.
Digital Skunk is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 8, 2011, 08:13 AM   #96
Dornblaser
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Chicago-area
Thanks. I have been playing with both demo programs and I am gravitating towards Aperture. I do some web development and Aperture works very well across my various Apple devices, which is a big plus. However, I certainly can see why LR is utilized by ProPhotogs. Everything considered this was a closer decision than I thought it would be, I could be happy with either program.
Dornblaser is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2011, 02:17 AM   #97
Randy McKown
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Kansas City
Both have their places in photography. There's things in Lightroom I wish were in Aperture. Of course I could say the opposite as well. However, I own a portrait studio and when it comes to running my business I go with Aperture. The reason being I can work completely in Aperture from start to finish. In Lightroom when I need to do some cloning or fix a bunch of stray hairs because the wind was crazy outside I'm basically forced to Export into Photoshop .. Fix it .. bounce back into Lightroom .. then the next pose I'm back to photoshop .. back to lightroom .. a 2 hour session outdoor in the wind just created a ton of bouncing back and forth. In Aperture I don't have to do that because it doesn't use a spot tool like lightroom. You can actually use a heal or clone brush directly on the RAW file. No extra TIF creation taking up space. It's just fast, easy and all without leaving the program. The only thing I do need to do is pop over to Photoshop in cases where a client requests a tummy tuck and I need the Liquify tool. However, that's done on spec so I'm not wasting a ton of time just preparing proofs for the sales appointment. That one thing alone makes Aperture the only business choice for me when it comes to portraiture.
Playing with landscapes and such that I take on my weekend road trips with the wife .. when I don't have an client to shoot .. then I like to use Lightroom. It's got the cool grad tool and I'm basically taking my time playing around and not trying to meet deadlines and think about maximizing my profits.
Aperture could stand to improve the vignette tool though .. it kinda sucks when compared to LR.
__________________
.
Subscribe to my YouTube Channel :: For Great Video Tutorials
Randy McKown is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2011, 12:04 PM   #98
snberk103
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: An Island in the Salish Sea
Just to add another voice to this thread. I use LR as my main tool for my photo business. Occasionally dipping into PS when needed. I agree that some of the logic behind the modules is quirky, but I'm used to them. That said, I actually enjoy working in LR.

However, I also keep a copy of Aperture around (thanks to the Mac App Store pricing it's not hard to do) because I like Aperture's book building module. When I want a book, I will export the images I I've already flagged and finagled in LR to Aperture, build the book, and send it off. I know that LR has the ability to add book-building plug-ins as well, but I'm used to the Apple way of doing it, having started in iPhoto.

Just watch out though, iPhoto and Aperture use seem to use different printing houses - so some options in iPhoto are not available in Aperture, and vice versa. And I was not able to find a way to move a completed book project into iPhoto.
__________________
My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - Jack Layton
snberk103 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2011, 11:34 AM   #99
radek42
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Here, there, and everywhere
Randy,

Thanks for extended post. As I was reading through it it seems like Ap would be better choice. However, my main focus would be family pictures and outdoor photography as a hobby (mostly landscape) and that's where you prefer LR.

I still haven't have time to try both side-by-side so I cannot really add my own experience. So far I have pro lists (without additional plugins) :
Aperture:
* might play nicer with other Apple software
* cheaper (still have Apple gift card); also can be installed on all my Macs
* book building and printing
* clone tool (I could perhaps get around PS all together)

Lightroom
* cross-platform (if I ever switch back to Win)
* I read that noise reduction is better

As I mentioned earlier (maybe even in another thread :-) I tried LR in the past under WinXP and I found it very un-intuitive (mostly due to modules as mentioned by others). I'll certainly give it a try again ... who knows.

As always, thanks for posting.

Cheers, Radek

Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy McKown View Post
Both have their places in photography. There's things in Lightroom I wish were in Aperture. Of course I could say the opposite as well. However, I own a portrait studio and when it comes to running my business I go with Aperture. The reason being I can work completely in Aperture from start to finish. In Lightroom when I need to do some cloning or fix a bunch of stray hairs because the wind was crazy outside I'm basically forced to Export into Photoshop .. Fix it .. bounce back into Lightroom .. then the next pose I'm back to photoshop .. back to lightroom .. a 2 hour session outdoor in the wind just created a ton of bouncing back and forth. In Aperture I don't have to do that because it doesn't use a spot tool like lightroom. You can actually use a heal or clone brush directly on the RAW file. No extra TIF creation taking up space. It's just fast, easy and all without leaving the program. The only thing I do need to do is pop over to Photoshop in cases where a client requests a tummy tuck and I need the Liquify tool. However, that's done on spec so I'm not wasting a ton of time just preparing proofs for the sales appointment. That one thing alone makes Aperture the only business choice for me when it comes to portraiture.
Playing with landscapes and such that I take on my weekend road trips with the wife .. when I don't have an client to shoot .. then I like to use Lightroom. It's got the cool grad tool and I'm basically taking my time playing around and not trying to meet deadlines and think about maximizing my profits.
Aperture could stand to improve the vignette tool though .. it kinda sucks when compared to LR.


----------

Thanks for your comments.

Somebody already mentioned different book options for Aperture and iPhoto. It's too bad. I could understand iPhoto having less options, but I'd expect Aperture to have it all since it's a paid application. I guess there is feedback for Apple :-)

Cheers, R>

Quote:
Originally Posted by snberk103 View Post
Just to add another voice to this thread. I use LR as my main tool for my photo business. Occasionally dipping into PS when needed. I agree that some of the logic behind the modules is quirky, but I'm used to them. That said, I actually enjoy working in LR.

However, I also keep a copy of Aperture around (thanks to the Mac App Store pricing it's not hard to do) because I like Aperture's book building module. When I want a book, I will export the images I I've already flagged and finagled in LR to Aperture, build the book, and send it off. I know that LR has the ability to add book-building plug-ins as well, but I'm used to the Apple way of doing it, having started in iPhoto.

Just watch out though, iPhoto and Aperture use seem to use different printing houses - so some options in iPhoto are not available in Aperture, and vice versa. And I was not able to find a way to move a completed book project into iPhoto.
radek42 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2011, 01:32 PM   #100
Dornblaser
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Chicago-area
Quote:
Originally Posted by radek42 View Post
As I mentioned earlier (maybe even in another thread :-) I tried LR in the past under WinXP and I found it very un-intuitive (mostly due to modules as mentioned by others). I'll certainly give it a try again ... who knows.

As always, thanks for posting.

Cheers, Radek



----------

One of the reasons that I chose Aperature over LR is that I found Aperature to be intuitive, at least for me.

- David
Dornblaser is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Special Interests > Visual Media > Digital Photography

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Lightroom 5 now or new Aperture later? hoodedwarbler12 Mac Applications and Mac App Store 21 Aug 9, 2013 11:29 AM
iPhoto vs. Aperture vs. Lightroom cmoroney Digital Photography 20 Feb 17, 2013 11:40 PM
iPhoto/Lightroom/Aperture ??? jigsb007 Mac Applications and Mac App Store 4 Jan 2, 2013 12:47 PM
Lightroom 4 or Aperture? Biggs88 Mac Applications and Mac App Store 1 Dec 6, 2012 05:07 PM
Aperture or Lightroom? Smiller4128 Mac Applications and Mac App Store 24 Jul 29, 2012 01:09 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:39 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC