Photographers: Which do you find best for organising and storing, iPhoto or Lightroom

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by NStocks, Aug 8, 2008.

  1. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Location:
    England
    #1
    I have being watching a few video podcasts of lightroom to boost my knowledge of it's capabilities, similairy watching the iPhoto tutorials preparing for when I get my iMac. I don't know which to choose for storing my photos. I like iPhoto because the scrolling feature which enables you to scroll through the photos in that folder can be very handy,it also looks simpler for viewing and displaying photos.The tagging and keywords I also think is better than what's in lightroom,and the fact that you can easily hide photos which saves deleting as many. Making projects also looks good.

    In lightroom, you have all the photos in one application; both RAW files and final Tif files which saves exporting to a different application. The histriy pane in lightroom is very handy too. I have just learnt about backing up in lightroom to an external hard drive ( which have yet to buy), does this backup work better than what time machine does?

    Any advice or input is appreciated, I know that both apllications have their advantages and disadvatlntages it's just deciding which one would work better

    NStocks
     
  2. macrumors 68020

    revenuee

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2003
    Location:
    A place where i am supreme emporer
    #2
    the better comparison is Aperture and Lightroom

    and Aperture is AWESOME
     
  3. macrumors 68000

    taylorwilsdon

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Location:
    Bay Area
    #3
    Frankly, I was a fan of Aperture, loved the quick raw processing... until I realized I was getting WAY better results in Photoshop. I switched to Bridge+Photoshop. More work? Absolutely. Better results? I think so.

    Skip iPhoto. I used it for years and now I've got hideous original/duplicate problems, lots of corrupted pics... bad situation :(
     
  4. thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Location:
    England
    #4
    Is it that bad? From what I saw the books created in iPhoto look really good and to a professional quality,like the other projects.

    Does aperture have a similar setup to lightroom with it's folder organising,and what about tagging and keywords, I want to start doing that when I make the switch. How does it backup, does it just use the same operation as what a music file would in time machine ?

    NStocks
     
  5. macrumors 68020

    revenuee

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2003
    Location:
    A place where i am supreme emporer
    #5
    http://www.apple.com/ca/aperture/

    Whatever that doesn't answer

    but to answer the questions -- yes they have tagging

    and the way i back up is I keep a duplicate of the library file on a separate hard drive --- there maybe a "cleaner" way to do it -- but I like it
     
  6. thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Location:
    England
    #6
    I'm actually warching the tutorials right now, and ok
    Not sure I like the interface, it looks at bit basic. When
    I get a mac I could always get the trial, if I decide it's worth it :p

    NStocks
     
  7. macrumors 68020

    revenuee

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2003
    Location:
    A place where i am supreme emporer
    #7
    you can open up all the menus to your heart desires and make it all cluttered :)
     
  8. macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2001
    Location:
    Fukuoka, Japan
    #8
    Aperture is as powerful as Lightroom (well, more or less, both apps have a few features the other one doesn't), but Aperture is on par. Aperture allows you to hide all windows and show only those that you want/need, that's why it `looks simple.'

    Download both, the trial of Aperture and Lightroom, take your time to fiddle around with it and see which one you prefer.
     
  9. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    #9
    It seems like you're relating its "basic" looks with limited functionality. Its basic look is the result of Apple's design brilliance. Aperture has incredible functionality without blasting the user with a million buttons, menus, and options.

    I take it from your last comment that you don't have a Mac and you're using PCs right now. I can understand why you'd be confused about how something can have an elegant, easy-to-use interface but still be functionally powerful. We mac users are used to it.
     
  10. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Location:
    New Jersey
    #10
    my vote is for Lightroom 2
    it is amazing application for cataloging photos, and the new gradient & adjustment brush in develop module really helps to avoid regular photoshop :)
     
  11. thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Location:
    England
    #11
    Yes, this is what I also like, but do you use Lightroom for storing all your'e photos, or do you use folders, or iPhoto. I forgot that Leopard has coverflow now, but does it support Tiff. files, and what about RAW? This functionalitiy would overcome the need to import Photo's into iPhoto, because it would be very simple to see which is which.

    In Aperture, do you get the same sort of tools like Lightroom, but they are just hidden for example, in the Develop module in Lighroom, you get the tone curve,saturation,vibrance,clarity,luminance and a whole set of sliders for improving the colour, aswell as great presets. Does anyone have a few minutes to take a few screenshots of Aperture with all, or most of the essential tools open ?

    I ca'nt try it yet because I don't own a Mac, but I could always get a tour from the Apple store too !

    Thanks for your'e help.

    NStocks
     
  12. macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2001
    Location:
    Fukuoka, Japan
    #12
    You shouldn't manipulate the file/folder structure in the Finder, so once you use Lightroom, iPhoto or Aperture, you should use these programs to manipulate the `location' of files and folders.

    Cover flow understands all image formats, but it's not meant as a replacement for a professional photo management app.
    As we said before, yes, it offers the same tools either as a HUD (heads-up display, a transparent palette) or instead of the folder structure. Feature-wise, Aperture and Lightroom are on par when it comes to editing.

    Aperture, however, is open for third-party plugins, so you can use the Noise Ninja or Viveza plugin, for example. Lightroom has (to my surprise) no open plugin architecture as with version 2 (which has just been released, I'm sure this will eventually change).

    Aperture does not have modules, because its workflow is fundamentally different from Lightroom's: you can do (almost) anything at any time. You do not have to switch modules, but only press a button to show/hide the palette you want.
    I suggest you have a look at the movies on Apple's website instead. Each movie focuses on a different aspect of Aperture, so just don't watch one. Obviously only a fraction of the features can be shown in such a short time. There are also tutorials for other features, just browse Apple's Aperture page a little and you'll find quite a few of them.

    Since you don't have a Mac yet, you can't really understand all the comments and I'm sure part of you wants to `be on the safe side and get an Adobe product', but judging from the forums, Aperture is as popular as Lightroom (although I don't have any figures). It's a so-called pro-app along the lines of Final Cut Pro or Photoshop (albeit younger). It is also the first product in its class (it has been released before Lightroom, Adobe was `forced' to publish a public beta as a response). Rumor has it that the guy who invented Aperture is also one of the inventors of Photoshop :wow:
     
  13. thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Location:
    England
    #13
    OK, I have yet to look through all the videosI didn't realise there were over 50 !

    NStocks
     
  14. macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2001
    Location:
    Fukuoka, Japan
    #14
    Start with the second link, I think it should give a rough idea about the tools.
     
  15. macrumors G3

    TuffLuffJimmy

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #15
    My vote is for aperture as well. It is so slick and easy to learn. I tried out Lightroom and it was nice, but I liked that Aperture did basically everything the same, but had a much cleaner interface.
     
  16. thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Location:
    England
    #16
    I've watched about 20 of the videos, and I'm starting to like it. I was that you can made the image full screen with not menus or toolbars, apart from the editing one, how easy is it to do this, can you just click a few buttons then your'e in ' full edit mode' ?

    How do you store your'e Photos, right now I copy all my RAW images from the memory card, to a master RAW folder. Then I import this folder into Lightroom, deleting bad Photo's, then work on the good ones. After I have chosen the good Photo's I like, I then Export those Photo's to another folder called Master Finished Photos, which are organised in sub folders to their catogories e.g Macro Landsacpe etc.

    Just wondered how users filed their photo's using Aperture

    NStocks
     
  17. macrumors G3

    TuffLuffJimmy

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #17
    to get to full screen mode you hit the F key. To bring up your tools you hit H

    Aperture Import process:
    connect camera card>>import into new project (or existing) in Aperture >>edit your photos (no changes are ever actually made to your original photo files) >> export finished photos as .tiff, jpeg, etc (all with near limitless control over the export process)
     
  18. macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2001
    Location:
    Fukuoka, Japan
    #18
    Well, you have to press exactly one button, F, and you're in fullscreen mode. If you press F again, you will leave fullscreen mode. The photo strip hides automatically (unless you want to have it on screen all the time, you can change that, too). You Show/Hide your photo adjustments HUD by pressing H.
    Aperture is flexible: either Aperture manages all your photos (which I strongly recommend in the beginning) where your pictures are automatically sorted in directories that Aperture creates and manages. This directory structure is not meant to be manipulated in the Finder! Since Aperture is an Apple product, you can access your whole library in most Open/Save dialogs without having to open Aperture or dive through directories. If you haven't used a Mac, it's hard to imagine, but if you use the Open dialog, you have a menu point called Media > Photos and from there, you can dive through all your Aperture projects and albums directly.

    The second possibility is to manage the location of the pictures manually. While this may sound appealing in the beginning, I strongly discourage you from using that in the beginning. It's a more advanced function with hidden caveats, but you can switch to this second mode at any point in time on a picture-by-picture basis!
    When you connect a camera, Aperture launches automatically and brings up the Import dialog. You then choose a target project (you may want to create one) and select the pictures you want to have imported (or just leave it as it is and import all of them). So you could make a rough selection here already. You can autostack them (autogrouping based on time), a very handy feature. You can add some common tags to them (e. g. location). Hit Import. Then you can start working on the pictures that have been imported already right away (obviously those that haven't been imported and processed cannot be touched yet).
     
  19. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2007
    #19
    Can you explain what you mean by "hideous original/duplicate problems, lots of corrupted pics" And, was this on the newer versions (i.e. current versions) or older versions. I believe they improved their database handling. Would love some details, even if just a PM, if you don't want to open it to public debate.
     

Share This Page