Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
anyway, are you guys saying aperture 2.0 is a good update?
Absolutely. I've used it to readjust some images in my library and the results are fantastic. Now I understand why everyone gets so hyped about shooting raw. What I can't say for sure is whether this reflects a strength in Aperture 2 or a weakness in Aperture 1.x.

Either way, I'm really happy with the new product.
 
I'm not going to smack you (unless you're a hot girl and we're talking about your bottom), but your comments on Aperture are dead on. To me though I cannot figure out really what is the difference between it and iphoto 08:confused:
Silicon gave the main point from a photography perspective. The other question is how you use your photo library. Aperture won't handle video, which iPhoto does. Aperture also has more limited slideshow and "sharing" options. The Aperture slide show is meant for a professional photographer to proof his shots.

We run both, actually... I use Aperture because I like the control (I guess I fall into the category of "prosumer" now that I'm finally back to shooting SLR after years away). My wife uses iPhoto because she likes the slideshows and movie options.
 
Absolutely. I've used it to readjust some images in my library and the results are fantastic. Now I understand why everyone gets so hyped about shooting raw. What I can't say for sure is whether this reflects a strength in Aperture 2 or a weakness in Aperture 1.x.

Either way, I'm really happy with the new product.

Weakness in 1.x. App's RAW processing was....poor to moderate. And you should always shoot RAW mainly due to dropping the brightness levels down from 12 to 14 bit to 8 bit. To understand why RAW is so important I recommend this read: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/u-raw-files.shtml
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.