Real World Users: Which has faster importing/previewing: LR4 or Aperture 3?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by jbg232, May 1, 2012.

  1. jbg232 macrumors 65816


    Oct 15, 2007
    I've been using Aperture 3 for a long time and now have about 50K images. Just upgraded to a 5D Mark III and that combined with my 4 year old computer are really causing me a LOT of headaches with waiting for importing/indexing/etc. I'm going to be get a new computer in a few months and want to know from REAL users whether LR4 is actually faster than Aperture 3 for initial image importing/indexing/rating/etc.

    When I started with Aperture 2, I compared LR to it and Aperture was noticeably faster. I don't have the computer resources right now to load my entire library onto LR4 to get a real world preview of it and want to know from serious photographers, WHO HAVE REAL WORLD EXPERIENCE, which is faster for batch importing/initial rating/previewing.

    Aside from this I have no other problems with Aperture 3 so please don't recommend LR4 over aperture for other features.
  2. maflynn Moderator


    Staff Member

    May 3, 2009
    TBH, I really don't see a major difference between the two. I think in my case LR is a bit slower because I convert my RAW files to DNG which is an added step.

    When doing strictly RAW imports w/o any DNG conversion I really didn't see any difference between the two.
  3. snberk103 macrumors 603

    Oct 22, 2007
    An Island in the Salish Sea
    I can't answer the question directly... but....

    Once you get your new computer you should find that the time to import photos with either package is pretty short, regardless. I spend way more time on the other tasks and the import time wasn't even a consideration. For me, the deciding factor was the noise reduction in Lr3 (now upgraded to Lr4). I couldn't even tell you how long it takes to import... it just is what it is....

    YMMV, of course... but I just throw that out there.

Share This Page