Yes really.
I know exactly where my things are.
Only if using Aperture and Aperture's existence in 30-40yrs time? Unlikely
I have learnt how useless that is when I switched from iView Media Pro to Aperture. Knowing where the files are is pointless, because the work is in the adjustments, the keywords and not just the file structure. All of this is lost, unless you export the photos with Aperture or Lightroom. I've lost literally hundreds of hours of work when making the switch (which was necessary, because of silent database corruption problems).
The whole point of fillig by date/label is that it is immune to database corruptions as it is not a database. Filing by date at the OS level is what I am talking about. Far more robust. And you can then add keywording etc on top of that. So even if database goes belly up. Finding my images is not a problem.
BTW I can also look at my developed images in Bridge without exporting them. So, having a file browser and a database solution is way better than just a database solution. Not to mentionif Aperture DB dies/gets corrupted you lose all your editing work, whereas wtith LR you don't if you save to XMP.
Aperture does not lack presets. It has tons of places where you can have presets (e. g. when keywording, importing, exporting, etc.). For adjustments, Apple has chosen a different philosophy with Lift + Stamp.
No, Presets are a specific feature, not present in Aperture, whereas Lift + Stamp is simply the same as Sync/Auto Sync is in LR.
In any case, to claim that one is waaayy better than the other is IMHO childish.
Not if that is actually the case. I'd like to use Aperture as it's apparently cheaper, but as it's slower + clunkier in use, it will actually cost me time and therefore money.
Besides seeing as LR has localised RAW editing and Aperture doesn't means LR trumps Aperture, just with that single feature, same goes for develop Presets.
And to repeat from above post as it's so important - if Aperture DB dies/gets corrupted you lose
all your editing work, whereas with LR you don't if you simply save to XMP. This 'tiny' little difference trumps any feature of any kind within either programme. As there's no point having a killer feature, if the work it does can be lost so easily.
No to argue. Just using the above to point out the way most people think.
We tend to make up a list of features and then compare the lists. That's really wrong. What we should do is make up a list of problems to be addressed and then look to see how each product address those problems. For example cameras: We can count how many auto focus points there are and say "11 is better then 5" but the problem might be tracking moving subjects, which camera is best. Maybe the camera with 5 points had a better motion estimation algorithm and did not need 11 points to achieve better performance? Same here. The problem is that you have 20 shots all in the same light, you want to white balance the shots but you don't want to have to do it 20 times. What's the best way? Apple's idea was that first you balance one image then tell Aperture to apply the same correction to the other 19. Aple calls this "lift and stamp". Would it have been better to first "link" the 20 shots by telling Aperture they were all in the same light and then white balance the whole set in mass? Three of ways to solve this problem. Lift and stamp, presets and "linking" but as soon you pick one the feature counters find two "missing features" but are they really missing or just un-needed? If the problem is solved I'd say un-needed.
It's like saying my car as several "missing features" no "choke" or mixture control, and the spark advance control is "missing". These feature were common in older cars. Are they missing or un-needed in my car? You can't compare feature lists. You have to compare lists of addressed problems.
But that's that I was doing.
Aperture cannot solve many problems that LR can. How? Simple LR has features that Aperture lacks. Just as LR lacks book publishing ability, so if I wanted to publish a book I'd have to use Aperture. Though I'd do all the work on images in LR/PS/Bridge and simply export finished shots to Aperture to lay out in book.
Also as explained above, Lift + Stamp is not a different approach to Presets, it's a completely different tool. Lift and Stamp is a syncing solution, equivalent to Sync/AutoSync button in LR, which is very different from having develop presets, saved as 'Presets' to get a specific look. Not to mention you can apply these on import.
What is most obvious when reading these discusions and feature request discusions is that people do not actually know how to use the software properly. As what they ask for, is actually there a lot of the time or they compare quite different tools as if they were the same.
