Do you use Aperture for your Photo Mangement? Average user?

Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by iBunny, Jul 30, 2007.

?

Photo Management. What do you use?

  1. iPhoto

    58.3%
  2. Aperture

    36.1%
  3. Other (explain)

    5.6%
  1. iBunny macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2004
    #1
    Who of you the Average user, uses Aperture vice iPhoto?

    Thats all I want to know. Not for photo editing etc, just to orginize and view your pics? I know that its pricey, since iPhoto is bundled... but who pays extra just to have Aperture?

    And im not talking about you photo editing enthusiasts... just the normal person.
     
  2. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #2
    I organize my digital camera photos using iPhoto. Anything I pull off of the internet gets Spotlight tagged.

    Aperture gives you a lot better workflow control and correction abilities. It's not per se best at management for most people. I looked into it for managing my photos and it didn't really offer what I wanted.
     
  3. Maui macrumors 6502a

    Maui

    Joined:
    May 18, 2007
    #3
    I switched to Macs about 3 months ago. I tried iPhoto, but I want something that uses and keeps the folder/file structure I have been using for years. So I switched to Aperture, which allows that. Now, though, with my iPhone, I find that Aperture is lacking on jpg tools.

    I'm starting to think I just go back to what I used in Windows: folders + Photoshop.
     
  4. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #4
    Folders in an application or in the file system?

    What bugs me as that Aperture will archive all your images into one package. I much more prefer Spotlight + iPhoto right now. I just need to find out some more about Spotlight arguments in order to figure out what I haven't tagged yet.
     
  5. nihilisticmonk macrumors 6502

    nihilisticmonk

    Joined:
    May 4, 2005
    #5
    As a total amateur SLR user, who is nowhere near a skilled camera user (yet!)
    I use aperture and I think it's pretty good.

    It's sure not perfect compared to iphotos. The web galleries are terribly plain compared to the comparable adobe product, but the keywords features are pretty good on 1.5.3, and the performance on a decent mac is good.
     
  6. killerrobot macrumors 68020

    killerrobot

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    Location:
    127.0.0.1
    #6
    Just for organizing/importing digital photos, iPhoto works fine for me.
     
  7. kuebby macrumors 68000

    kuebby

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2007
    Location:
    SFV
    #7
    iPhoto does everything I need.

    The only thing that I don't really like is how it organizes pictures into folders. I was a Windows user for years and getting used to not relying on Finder/Explorer has been hard for me.
     
  8. Dembo macrumors regular

    Dembo

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Location:
    London, UK / Frankfurt, Germany
    #8
    I have not played around with Aperture but I think the one drawback of iPhoto '06 is the lack of decent XMP support. At the moment my workflow is

    - tag using Adobe's Bridge
    - build slideshows and reduce to albums in iPhoto

    It is somewhat bumpy and would be a lot easier if iPhoto would re-scan the pictures metadata. If anybody has a good idea to accomplish this aside from a complete refresh of the iPhoto library: Let me know. :)
     
  9. M@lew macrumors 68000

    M@lew

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2006
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #9
    I use Lightroom, but I did use Aperture for a bit. Then again, I couldn't think of really anyone who would get Aperture/Lightroom etc. if they weren't a photo enthusiast. A lot of people get it because they shoot a lot of images or shoot RAW and usually those people are enthusiasts anyway.

    The average user wouldn't even know what to do with Aperture so I wouldn't see the point of getting it unless they were super rich and had money to burn. If you're not going to use the editing features, it's almost a waste of money. For editing, iPhoto does that. Almost the biggest reason to get Aperture over iPhoto is because of non-destructive editing as iPhoto creates a duplicate whenever you even touch a photo.
     
  10. zerolight macrumors 6502

    zerolight

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Location:
    Glasgow
    #10
    My workflow:

    Camera -> Aperture - correct / weed out the crap -> iPhoto to manage/organise.
     
  11. bigandy macrumors G3

    bigandy

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2004
    Location:
    Murka
    #11
    but all you need to do is right click the APLibrary and click show package contents. there ya go, files and folders.

    I'm not a fan of the way it stores the pictures in the folder structure (i'd change it a bit), but it's not something that bothers me. It's not something that I need to do anything about.

    I use Aperture because I can't stand iPhoto or Lightroom... :rolleyes:
     
  12. kitki83 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #12
    Why doesnt anyone use that program that comes with Adobe CS3? It seems pretty easy to use. Adobe Bridge
     
  13. Mac In School macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2007
    #13
    What is this "tagging" you refer to?

    I do my keyword tagging in iPhoto, and the EXIF data stays in-tact, so I'm curious about this other type of "tagging".
     
  14. termina3 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Location:
    TX
    #14
    Oh, but there's so much more you can add beyond keywords and what your camera does...

    Copyrights, Author, website, notes/comments, captions, etc, etc
     
  15. termina3 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Location:
    TX
    #15
    Some do. I prefer Aperture because it just... flows. And it's cheaper than PS, so I got it first.
     
  16. Mac In School macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2007
    #16
    Ahhhh... The stuff found in File Info in PS. That's a good idea to run stuff through there first. Thanks.

    If I use Bridge, instead of a Photoshop Action, will it update this stuff without re-saving (thus re-compressing) JPG photos?
     
  17. termina3 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Location:
    TX
    #17
    can't say for sure, but EXIF data should be a separate file from the actual picture

    also, doesn't bridge work with previews only? I dunno... I use Aperture, which is completely lossless :)
     
  18. M@lew macrumors 68000

    M@lew

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2006
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #18
    Lightroom is more of an advanced version of Bridge.
     
  19. Dembo macrumors regular

    Dembo

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Location:
    London, UK / Frankfurt, Germany
    #19
    It will modify the meta data without recompressing and using templates in Bridge is an excellent option (at least for my workflow). If only I could get iPhoto to re-import the metadata from the XMP. Picassa (on the Windows side) did monitor the files for changes and updated its library when they occurred...
     
  20. pprior macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2007
    #20
    Silly question

    The question states only "average people" not "photo enthusiasts".

    Well I think by definition if you're willing to pay $300 for a photo management program you're likely to be at least a "photo enthusiast" by definition. So I think the answer to your question as defined is 0%.

    Having said that, aperture is so much more powerful for photo management than iphoto. I bought my first mac (Mac Pro) based primarily on it alone. I've got thousands of photos, so I'm an enthusiast certainly. It takes more work than just chucking them into an iphoto library, but the pay off is much higher as well.
     

Share This Page