iPhoto vs Aperture 2.0 ---- Opinions Wanted

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by harcosparky, Mar 5, 2008.

  1. harcosparky macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2008
    #1
    OK, up until now I have been using iPhoto and Photoshop to work with images.

    I am considering adopting Aperture, as I have been using the 30 day Demo and like what I see.

    I guess what I am trying to figure out is do I need both Aperture and iPhoto?

    Is there anything iPhoto can do that Aperture cannot do?

    Are there any good reasons to keep both?

    Thanks! :D
     
  2. taylorwilsdon macrumors 68000

    taylorwilsdon

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Location:
    Bay Area
    #2
    iPhoto is for people with point and shoot cameras.

    I don't mean to be a snob, but if you can't tell the difference, then you probably don't need it. Aperture has some pretty powerful raw workflow tools in 2.0, where iPhoto is basically smash and grab.

    If you are shooting jpeg only and not editing (or editing in photoshop) the iPhoto may well be good enough for you.
     
  3. harcosparky thread starter macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2008
    #3



    I don't mean to sound stupid .... I can tell the difference but Aperture is new to me and I have questions about it. I thought this was the appropriate place to ask questions, even stupid ones! :D

    Actually I shoot exclusively in RAW. So far the Aperture Demo has stolen my heart. As I use it I see no reason to continue using iPhoto.

    I always open the RAW image, do any editing and save it in the appropriate format.

    All I ever used iPhoto for was a place to store and organize image files.
     
  4. nutmac macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    #4
    IMO, iPhoto '08 has more effective noise reduction. Otherwise, I see no reason for choosing iPhoto '08 over Aperture (assuming cost and learning curve are not issues).
     
  5. ChrisA macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #5
    Apple has a video that answers this exact question. It's about 20 minutes long. It was made for Aperture 1.5 but only details have changed
    http://seminars.apple.com/seminarsonline/aperture15iphoto/apple/index1.html

    I'm transitioning from iPhoto to Aperture. Because they can both access the same collection of files you don't have to make an overnight switch. You can use both for a while. That's my plan. I;m putting some new photos in Aperture and I'll learn how to use it, memorize the shortcuts and so on. I think this is the best justification for using both -- transitioning.
     
  6. ChrisA macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #6
    Better noise reduction? Are you on Leopard and Aperture 2.0? What camera do you have? It could depend on the camera.

    I've looked at raw conversion of Nikon D50 files shot at 800 ISO and the new 2.0 raw conversion engine is very good. Then I compare the 1.5 engine using the same file and wow, not nearly as good. So if you setup would be using the 1.5 engine I can see where you might be right. You need both Leopard and 2.0 to get the 2.0 engine.

    I agree about the learning curve. If you are not prepared for 10 to 20 hours of study and "just trying stuff" Aperture is not for you. You have to be willing to read the docs and watch the video. If you dan't have time for that then use iPhoto. iPhoto works really well if you shoot jpg and do your corrections in Photoshop
     
  7. nutmac macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    #7
    Aperture's 2.0 RAW processor is superior to iPhoto '08, which uses the standard OS X RAW processor that immediately converts to JPEG. What I am talking about is the noise reduction refinement feature on iPhoto '08 and Aperture. Although iPhoto is a bit aggressive, I find it to be more effective at reducing high ISO noise than Aperture 2, which IMO, does very ineffective job.
     
  8. harcosparky thread starter macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2008
    #8
    Thanks for that link - Apple sure knows how to put things together.

    I'll be buying Aperture today!!!!
     
  9. IC3D macrumors regular

    IC3D

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2008
    Location:
    Fairfield County, CT
    #9
    I have both and I like Aperture better. My preference though. It just really does great things with ease.
     
  10. harcosparky thread starter macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2008
    #10
    Well I have been using iPhoto, but just as a place to store image files. I shoot 99% in RAW and use Photoshop as an editor.

    After watching that Apple video, I can see that I should have be using Aperture. I think maybe a class could show me more, but I already now know three times what I knew before that video and I am not even done watching it yet! :D

    There are a couple of tools in Aperture that make it well worth the cost. I believe it will save me a lot of time.

    I can see myself migrating away from iPhoto in the near future for my use, it will still be on the systems for my children to use as the shoot with P&S cameras in jpg format. ( for now ). Once my EOS 5D gets here, the oldest will get my 30D!
     
  11. sadilak macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Location:
    NY
    #11
    I use expression Media And Corel Graphics Suite and am not disappointed so far.
     

Share This Page