Any reason to own Aperture and Lightroom?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by TheDrift-, Jun 22, 2011.

  1. TheDrift-, Jun 22, 2011
    Last edited: Jun 22, 2011

    TheDrift- macrumors 6502a

    TheDrift-

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2010
    #1
    As the title says .....Any reason to own Aperture and Lightroom?

    I currently use Aperture and have CS5 and camera raw...

    never really saw the need for lightroom, I did try it once and quickly decided there was no way I was paying £170.00 for it....not considering A3's price, and gave up on it after only 30 mins or so.

    However i'm thinking of gettting a graphics tablet and basically I can get Lightroom 3 on top for an extra £50.00

    Is it worth getting for that price? Had it been that price when I tried it I might have been inclined to give it more of a go......

    ....or have I got the bases pretty much covered?

    Anyone here use both?...does it give any advantages or do you just find yourself using one of them?

    Thanks
    Shaun
     
  2. Ruahrc macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2009
    #2
    Well if you didn't find the use in it back then, you probably won't find the use in it now.

    Perhaps, if possible, you can give the trial another run-through and see if there is some feature you really like, and would put up with the workflow hassles to use both softwares.
     
  3. OreoCookie macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2001
    Location:
    Sendai, Japan
    #3
    One reason I can come up with is when Lightroom users want to use Aperture to make books. Another is that there may be some people who prefer to manage their photos with Aperture, but that for some, they want to use Lightroom to process a few picks. Do whatever works for you. :)
     
  4. mackmgg macrumors 65816

    mackmgg

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    #4
    If you have CS5, then Lightroom might be easier. It's much more streamlined with the other Adobe applications than Aperture. Because of that, you'll probably find yourself using one or the other, but rarely both at the same time. At one point I had both Aperture and Lightroom, and I would use them for different cameras. Now I exclusively use Lightroom, because I find it much easier with CS5.
     
  5. Edge100 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    May 14, 2002
    Location:
    Where am I???
    #5
    I have Aperture solely for this reason.

    I can't stand it as a RAW processing application, but the books are terrific.
     
  6. Badbaw macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    #6
    Can you elaborate on that last statement please. I work strictly in RAW, and the only area I might be able to complain about, is color processing (and only really with harsh light/skin tone causing unbalanced green/yellow hues).

    A friend always tooted the implementation of custom presets in Lightroom, and I agree. It's much more accessible. In my experience, Lightroom is much speedier than Aperture as well. No idea if that still remains true.
     
  7. Edge100 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    May 14, 2002
    Location:
    Where am I???
    #7
    Aperture is just dog slow on every machine I've every tried it on.

    But my choice to use Lightroom has more to do with what Lightroom has, rather than what Aperture has not. I just find Lightroom suits my way of working much better than Aperture. Other may feel the opposite.

    But for books, Aperture is far better (considering LR doesn't do books at all...).
     
  8. pdxflint macrumors 68020

    pdxflint

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2006
    Location:
    Oregon coast
    #8
    I'm a LR3 user, and I've had Aperture 2 for quite a while. I actually like the modules workflow in LR, the noise reduction, custom presets, lens correction presets, printing setup, and the overall speed, which is good even on an older Macbook Pro. The slideshow is somewhat limited. Now in the Mac app store the lower price is actually making me consider adding Aperture 3 to the mix, mainly for books and possibly slideshow creation, and because of the easy integration with other Apple Mac apps.

    I guess for that low price it might be worth picking LR3 up and giving it a good test. Just import whatever images/folders you want without copying or moving the files... let it manage them by reference. Then give it a good wringing out. You may find things you like about it while still keeping Aperture. Most likely you'll end up using one a lot more than the other, but I couldn't tell you which one that would be - I was surprised I switched for the most part, but I'm happy...
     
  9. georgemann macrumors regular

    georgemann

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    Location:
    Seattle, Washington & Siem Reap, Cambodia
    #9
    I'm going to repeat basically what everyone else is saying.

    It doesn't cost anything to try Lightroom 3, and you may really like the newest version, so why not give it a shot.

    Aside from that I don't believe that Apple's heart is really into providing a solution for professional (and high end enthusiast) photographers, and I am afraid that at some point they may stop developing it. Or completely rebuild it without warning, so that it will work better on the iPads.

    Look what they just did with FinalCut Pro.
     
  10. Badrottie Suspended

    Badrottie

    Joined:
    May 8, 2011
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #10
    It is sad LR does not work with Photoshop Element.
     
  11. paulsalter macrumors 68000

    paulsalter

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #11
    In what way doesn't it work ?

    I use LR and Photoshop Elements (version 9) without any problems
     
  12. snberk103 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Location:
    An Island in the Salish Sea
    #12
    Can anyone say whether the book building module in Aperture is better than in iPhoto? I've got LR3 and iPhoto, and will occasionally move images in iPhoto for a book project. I've been tempted to add Aperture to see if the book building module is better than in iPhoto - but perhaps I can save some time by asking here instead.

    For what it's worth, for anyone who tried LR2 and didn't find it to their liking, try the noise reduction in LR3. For me this alone was a compelling reason to upgrade from LR2.
     
  13. mofunk macrumors 68000

    mofunk

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2009
    Location:
    Americas
    #13
    The book feature is better in Aperture vs iPhoto. For some reason the print quality is better too with Aperture.


    I have both. Aperture for the books and some of the filter/brushes are really sweet. Lightroom 3 I use more for quick fixes. Any major flubs I go to Photoshop. or if I need to do a panoramic shot. :cool:
     
  14. snberk103 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Location:
    An Island in the Salish Sea
    #14
    Thanks for the thoughts on the books... I'll have to try out Aperture. Isn't that what PS is for? Fixing Flubs? :) Not that I ever ;) flub a photo.....

    @OP It's nice having all of these tools at your disposal. I use LR 'cause I get a really good educators price on the CS package, including LR. But I use iPhoto (and now it seems, Aperture too) when needed for specialty things. The trick is to use just one tool for all of the basic work, and then the other tools only on an "as needed" basis. Otherwise your images get scattered all over creation....

    Good Luck.....
     
  15. TheDrift- thread starter macrumors 6502a

    TheDrift-

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2010
    #15
    Thanks for the reply's thought I'd give you all a quick update, I did some looking round and I got the same package with lightroom for only an extra £30.00. So for that price thought I'd give it a go.

    Not had chance to try it out properly and decide if I will make the switch from Aperture....but I suppose i've got lots of options if I need them!
     

Share This Page