I think it all depends on how your brain is wired. I find Aperture more natural to use than Lightroom, and I've always hated the separation between "Library" and "Develop" in Lightroom. Also, Aperture has superior support for two screens - Lightroom was very late to that party and its implementation isn't nearly as good.
Aperture has bugs, sure. But I prefer it over Lightroom by an order of magnitude. In my book, Aperture is -the- killer application for OS X.
100% agreed, and based on the Lightroom 3 Beta, I don't see Lightroom catching up to Aperture as far as features go. I still use Lightroom for the main edits on the professional, client, freelance stuff, but after that I send the finished products right to Aperture for everything else.
There are also far more features for output on the Aperture side than Lightroom, and much better support for video.
Depends entirely on your hardware though, it runs really badly on a Mac Mini. Lightroom on the other hand is fine (o.k. it slows when you've a lot of brush corrections etc, but other than that it's perfect on my C2D 2ghz Mini. Aperture 3 was painful in comparision).
True, and Lightroom runs better than Aperture on any machine you put it on in terms of hardware. I just wish they'd drop the ridiculous module thing and put more InDesign book layout features into the program.
I never really understood this complaint. In Aperture, you have to switch the the Adjustments tab, in Lightroom, you have to switch to the Develop Module (i.e., press "d"). Big difference? Really?
Not to mention that many commands are independent of the module: Want to crop an image? Press "r", and you'll get the crop interface within the Develop Module, no matter where you were to begin with.
Yes, it does make a HUGE difference, especially when you are in the Develop module and want to move a project or switch to another project or make a slideshow, etc. etc. There is a huge difference between a HUD and a module/complete GUI change.
In Aperture you just press H and the hud comes up for the adjustments, or the projects (you decide) then you don't have to worry about that pseudo switch, you just click. And you can't make any finer adjustments from the Library module in LR. You can't create a new project or folder from the Develop or Slideshow modules. Those UI problems are a real PITA for a shooters that want optimum control.
Then there's the organization of the library that's still awful in LR. Even the difference in the little icons in Aperture is a great plus over LR.
I wouldn't shout for joy about the book layout features of Aperture, but I don't see why Adobe won't put something in there for LR with all of their desktop publishing experience. Same thing for the Flash galleries which could be MUCH better
And LR's adjustment tools need a serious overhaul since Aperture 3 was released. I haven't sunk my teeth deep into LR3 Beta, but with the small projects I did test on it I did feel that Adobe made well needed improvements, but you're getting the same nuances that keep me using both Aperture and LR.
p.s. Aperture 3 has made it even easier for me to use both programs, and keep metadata the same, another big plus.
