Best way to manage photos for a semi-pro

mac mac mac

macrumors regular
Original poster
Oct 8, 2008
133
0
Bellevue, WA
Hi,

I just bought the Canon Rebel T1i last month and I'm loving it so far. I have been using iPhoto, and I really like how you can manage all of your photos in one place and all the other extras (e.g. faces, places, facebook, etc).

Since I'll be shooting in RAW with the new camera, I'm planning to move over to either Aperture or Lightroom. I'm using the trial version of Aperture and Lightroom 3 Beta now. Do you know what's the best way to manage my photo library? Is there a way to manage all of my photos in one place, and be able to easily upload my pictures to Facebook or face detection?

I know in Aperture I can import photos from my iPhoto library, and either copy over the the Aperture library or leave it in its current location without re-importing again. If I leave it in its current location, where are the modified files stored? Do most of you maintain more than just one library (eg 1 for iphoto, one for Aperture)? Any suggestion would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
 

TuffLuffJimmy

macrumors G3
Apr 6, 2007
8,989
25
Portland, OR
I'd wait until Aperture 3 (or X, whatever it's called) or I'd go with LightRoom. I, personally, am an Aperture user, but there aren't that big of differences between the two.

I use iPhoto for family events and parties (which I shoot in jpeg), and Aperture for my photography (which I shoot RAW).
 

Nostromo

macrumors 65816
Dec 26, 2009
1,358
2
Deep Space
Question is if you need a catalog.

You can also get Capture One and use a speedy browser with search feature. Photo Mechanic is very popular.

If you buy Photoshop, Bridge CS4 is a good application to work with.

Lightroom does only work with Adobe Camera RAW. If you want to ever use a different RAW processor (like Capture One, DxO) you are effed.

I own Expression Media as a catalogue software, but it's complicated, it's by Microsoft (who bought the former iView Media Pro), and it's no longer supported.

If you are just starting out, I'd try out a few RAW processors (Capture One, DxO) and try out Photo Mechanic, and get Photoshop with CS4 (if you haven't already got it).
 

Jaro65

macrumors 68040
Mar 27, 2009
3,703
563
Seattle, WA
Since you have a Canon product, didn't it also come with CameraWindow and ImageBrowser applications? You should be able to automatically upload photos from your camera onto your Mac and have an associated (date stamped) directory created as part of that process. From there you can import to Aperture or to Lightroom. I have both, but have been mostly using Lightroom lately.
 

TuffLuffJimmy

macrumors G3
Apr 6, 2007
8,989
25
Portland, OR
Since you have a Canon product, didn't it also come with CameraWindow and ImageBrowser applications? You should be able to automatically upload photos from your camera onto your Mac and have an associated (date stamped) directory created as part of that process. From there you can import to Aperture or to Lightroom. I have both, but have been mostly using Lightroom lately.
You can do all of that with LightRoom and Aperture while skipping the Canon applications. Or you can let the applications manage your photos in their own libraries.
 

Nostromo

macrumors 65816
Dec 26, 2009
1,358
2
Deep Space
Since you have a Canon product, didn't it also come with CameraWindow and ImageBrowser applications? You should be able to automatically upload photos from your camera onto your Mac and have an associated (date stamped) directory created as part of that process. From there you can import to Aperture or to Lightroom. I have both, but have been mostly using Lightroom lately.
Sorry, but Image Browser sucks big time. Very low display quality of the shots.
 

sarge

macrumors 6502a
Jul 20, 2003
582
119
Brooklyn
I second that Lightroom reccommendation.

I tried to get away w/using Bridge and purchased LR for the RAW converter as much as anything. I could have bought Phase One or some such but I wouldn't have benefited from the cataloging capabilities of LR.

As others will tell you, you can test drive both of these apps (about a month if I recall) to get an idea of what will work best for you. I recently moved all my media to another hard drive and it came off w/o a hitch with all my catalogs intact. I now think of this software as essential and can't imagine working w/o it -it aleviates a lot of the frustration of managing your images.


EDIT:
There is a publishing tab which you can upload to flickr, etc., but Aperture may have the edge here..

Good luck whatever you decide
 

Winni

macrumors 68040
Oct 15, 2008
3,117
926
Germany.
Lightroom 2. This is no competition.
Aperture 2. There is no competition. I just don't like the way Lightroom works. Or, more precisely, how Lightroom wants -- me -- to work. Aperture feels more natural to me. For me, Aperture is -- the -- killer application for OS X. I'd probably have dumped the Mac a year or two ago if it wasn't for Aperture.
 

Nostromo

macrumors 65816
Dec 26, 2009
1,358
2
Deep Space
Lightroom 2. This is no competition.
This is simply not true.

There are two big drawbacks with Lightroom.

1. You can only use Camera RAW

2. You will never be able to use another RAW processor and have the images in your library. You'll be stuck with Lightroom.

Should you decide to move to another DAM software later (Photo Mechanic is coming out with a full fledged one), then you lose all your catalog data. Even if you used something outdated like Expression Media, you could at least export the catalog data.
 

Nostromo

macrumors 65816
Dec 26, 2009
1,358
2
Deep Space
To the OP:

Check out RAW converters first, then only choose your DAM software (if at all you need one. A good image browser like Photo Mechanic or Bridge would be enough for most).
 

Kronie

macrumors 6502a
Dec 4, 2008
929
0
Lightroom or Aperture. Preferences vary. I use Lightroom.

I, personally, am an Aperture user, but there aren't that big of differences between the two.
Aperture doubles your library size by making a duplicate in its own aperture file, just like itunes and iphoto. I didn't see a walk around for this in my limited use.
 

TuffLuffJimmy

macrumors G3
Apr 6, 2007
8,989
25
Portland, OR
Aperture doubles your library size by making a duplicate in its own aperture file, just like itunes and iphoto. I didn't see a walk around this in my limited use.
The easy "walk around" is to delete the files that it imported since there's no reason in having two of the same file, or ask Aperture to not import the files in its library and you can manage them yourself. Just like in iPhoto and iTunes.

That's a user error, not an Aperture drawback.
 

Jaro65

macrumors 68040
Mar 27, 2009
3,703
563
Seattle, WA
Lightroom or Aperture. Preferences vary. I use Lightroom.



Aperture doubles your library size by making a duplicate in its own aperture file, just like itunes and iphoto. I didn't see a walk around this in my limited use.
Is this really the case? As I recall you can select in Aperture to use the files in their original destination, as compared to creating the Aperture Library and moving all imported photos there as well.
 

Jaro65

macrumors 68040
Mar 27, 2009
3,703
563
Seattle, WA
The easy "walk around" is to delete the files that it imported since there's no reason in having two of the same file, or ask Aperture to not import the files in its library and you can manage them yourself. Just like in iPhoto and iTunes.

That's a user error, not an Aperture drawback.
Apparently you managed to hit the 'Enter' key before I did. :)
 

TuffLuffJimmy

macrumors G3
Apr 6, 2007
8,989
25
Portland, OR
Is this really the case? As I recall you can select in Aperture to use the files in their original destination, as compared to creating the Aperture Library and moving all imported photos there as well.
No, it is not the case. Please Kronie, don't spread misinformation. That causes a lot of confusion and when that confusion is around "where do I spend $200?" that just plain sucks.
 

Jaro65

macrumors 68040
Mar 27, 2009
3,703
563
Seattle, WA
This is simply not true.

There are two big drawbacks with Lightroom.

1. You can only use Camera RAW

2. You will never be able to use another RAW processor and have the images in your library. You'll be stuck with Lightroom.

Should you decide to move to another DAM software later (Photo Mechanic is coming out with a full fledged one), then you lose all your catalog data. Even if you used something outdated like Expression Media, you could at least export the catalog data.
This is just like another Mac vs PC discussions. I have both Aperture and Lightroom and they're both excellent applications. They both offer basically the same functionality, though using a different workflow. No clear winners here. The choice depends on your personal preferences. Having said that, the Lightroom does support more camera formats, which was my main reason for getting it.
 

Razeus

macrumors 603
Jul 11, 2008
5,166
1,769
This is simply not true.

There are two big drawbacks with Lightroom.

1. You can only use Camera RAW

2. You will never be able to use another RAW processor and have the images in your library. You'll be stuck with Lightroom.

Should you decide to move to another DAM software later (Photo Mechanic is coming out with a full fledged one), then you lose all your catalog data. Even if you used something outdated like Expression Media, you could at least export the catalog data.
If you plan on sticking with using the superior and unparalleled Lightroom, you would have not a need to export such data.

Why go with Aperture? It doesn't get the proper resources, updates, plug ins, community, how to videos and integration with Photoshop like Lightroom 2 does. That alone makes LR the better choice.
 

TuffLuffJimmy

macrumors G3
Apr 6, 2007
8,989
25
Portland, OR
If you plan on sticking with using the superior and unparalleled Lightroom, you would have not a need to export such data.
That's awful shortsighted. What if Adobe slows development of LR, or another developer leapfrogs over LR?

Why go with Aperture? It doesn't get the proper resources, updates, plug ins, community, how to videos and integration with Photoshop like Lightroom 2 does. That alone makes LR the better choice.
Perhaps because you prefer the workflow. :rolleyes:
 

dazey

macrumors 6502
Dec 9, 2005
290
21
I am an aperture user and recommend you go with aperture or lightroom but suggest you take a long look at lightroom. I am considering changing (which is a big shift when you have a large library). I don't feel that Apple provides adequate support for aperture and camera updates are too slow while adobe gets them out a lot faster.
 

Nostromo

macrumors 65816
Dec 26, 2009
1,358
2
Deep Space
If you plan on sticking with using the superior and unparalleled Lightroom, you would have not a need to export such data.

Why go with Aperture? It doesn't get the proper resources, updates, plug ins, community, how to videos and integration with Photoshop like Lightroom 2 does. That alone makes LR the better choice.
Of course, if you know you're going to stick with it.

But RAW processing only matured a few years back.

A lot of new developments are still in the pipeline. Localized editing has started in Lightroom, Bibble, and Capture One Pro, and who knows if parametric editing will push Photoshop's pixel editing off the table?

It also depends on your needs as a photographer. I shoot mostly people, and for me Capture One delivers the best skin tones.

Who knows what who will take the lead five, ten years from now?

Some people also like metadata writting into sidecar files, while Lightroom stores all editing instructions in the database. Some people like it, some don't. And who knows what will be standard in ten years?

Choice of software: there are also many fans of DxO. It's also a great piece of software.

It's all about your preferences. It's good to have the facts and then decide on what you want to do.
 

Kronie

macrumors 6502a
Dec 4, 2008
929
0
No, it is not the case. Please Kronie, don't spread misinformation. That causes a lot of confusion and when that confusion is around "where do I spend $200?" that just plain sucks.
I didn't say there wasn't a solution only that I didn't find one. What I said was accurate to my limited use of the product.
 

TuffLuffJimmy

macrumors G3
Apr 6, 2007
8,989
25
Portland, OR
I didn't say there wasn't a solution only that I didn't find one. What I said was accurate to my limited use of the product.
Which is inaccurate for someone looking to buy the products. If you don't have any real experience with a product then it's bad to spread issues you think you've found, but haven't checked out.