I use Apple's Aperture along with CS6 and Nik Silver Effects 2. I really like Aperture but have grown increasingly concerned that Apple has identified it as a non-core product and it will die a slow death. I have contemplated converting to LR, but not yet pulled the trigger.
Anyone have any advice or insight into Aperture's future? I'd hate to make the move and then fell like moving back. I expect the move will be a hassle.
I'd like to have a crystal ball too.... Still the latest version (3.4.1.) has corrected quite a lot of things and noise management is now better then in LR 4 (I have the two of them). The only left over point would be (for me ) the lens correction module. PTLens or other add-ons sort of gets you out of Aperture (another window, etc.) So I'm not so ure it's dying, but I agree that it's definitely on some waiting tracks, maybe because of iPads popularity, those big number crunching softwares are being overtaken by many little quick and dirty (but efficient) apps ?
Tue 23-Oct-12 12:41 AM | edited Tue 23-Oct-12 12:42 AM by dgs2
I share your conern. To the point where I bought LR 4. I use both but, for me, Aperture has a better interface and seems just a little bit easier to learn and use. That said, the Kelby book for LR 4 has helped me quite a bit. So far, there is not clear winner, but I feel pressure to make a choice so I can stop learning software and go back to taking and working with my picture. The way I see it, here are the advantages to LR 4:
* Both PC and Mac
* Part of Adobe's core business
* Used by more pros and serious photographers (may also be considered the industry standard for serious photographers).
Apple has a big "event" planned for tomorrow. Who knows, maybe they will surprise everybody and announce Aperture 4 along with the Mini iPad.
I'm going LR4 too for the underlying reasons you give plus it's just so more capable.
The lens module is great and especially useful with vignetting on FX. The adjustments, especially the astonishing "clarity" slider take you into Nik plug-in territory. The presets are better too. The native RAW conversions are far nicer
It's not at all hard to use. it's like combining Nik tools and Aperture into one thing. And I still have the Nik tolls whenever I need them. I love the Lightroom 4 unmasked e-book too.
I also never enjoyed the idea of having an Aperture database. I rather like seeing where the files are!
"I also never enjoyed the idea of having an Aperture database. I rather like seeing where the files are!"
This is something I was curious about - I don't have Aperture but tinkering with iPhoto over the years (and answering panicked calls from less experienced friends scouring their Macs for their photos!) one thing I really don't like about iPhoto is the way it gobbles up disk space with multiple previews, thumbnails etc... and adding insult to injury 'hides' them all in a 'package' where they are far from obvious to the typical user.
Aperture does hide everything in a package. I am now running Aperture and LR, just to see the differences. My Aperture library is almost twice the size of the files in LR4. I do like seeing my real files in LR.
After running both, I find Aperture's interface much better. I also like the way Aperture knows which focal point on my camera I used and shows it on the photo.
LR does much better at noise reduction and, of course, lens correction, which Aperture does not have.
iPhoto and Aperture libraries are now identical. If you want to see the original files, you can right-click on the library, and select something like 'See Contents' (not at home, so I can't check the exact phrase). Or just go to Terminal (/Applications/Utilities), and cd into the directory.
The easiest way to be able to search your files would be to import the files as "Referenced" files. Aperture will place a preview in the database but the actual file will remain in the location you have it stored. So for example, if you have all of your NEFs/JPGS on an external drive in a folder directory, importing as referenced files will leave them in your original location. There is no need to import them into the database unless you want Aperture to manage all of your files.
Sun 06-Jan-13 08:26 PM | edited Sun 06-Jan-13 08:33 PM by William Symonds
How are you finding Aperture converts NEFs with with the D600? I far prefer the LR 4.3 conversions with the D600 presets a valuable additional tool. That was what pushed me to LR4 though the lens correction had much to do with it too.
It is possible that the Aperture interface is achieved only at the expense of the database. I was very frustrated with file management until I went into the database. It is certainly far easier moving between projects without having to go into the library mode and then back to develop. And the Apple Mail interface is far slicker, (but just try getting Aperture to link with MS Outlook!). Aperture wins on spot removal too, but I am slowly getting there with LR4.
>Philip >How are you finding Aperture converts NEFs with with the D600?
Hi Will, Well I haven't yet used Aperture thus my question. I've used LR off and on but only ever had a 'spare' license for LR2 which is now way too out of date to bother with.
So I've been sticking with my default workflow of simply using Adobe Bridge to browse, organize and PS (CS5) to edit. Unfortunately of course CS5 doesn't support D600 RAW (which I think is a really cheap move by Adobe but what can you do?). I'm resistant to upgrading PS CS6 because of this. One work around is one I mentioned using the DNG convertor but when I've used this path in the past I've found it tiresome to repeatedly make the conversion and deal with the original NEFs etc... I'm shooting up to 20K images a year. Add to that the nice new features of ACR 7 that I'm now missing with my 6.7 version that is still CS5 compatible.
So have been entertaining buying either LR or Aperture and getting on with one or the other.
As a longtime Mac user I am open to Aperture but well aware of the aging version vs> a nice new version of LR at twice the price.
With a D600 I would recommend that you give Aperture a wide berth (assuming you cannot trial it these days). The D600 NEF conversions are ghastly IMHO and fixing the inevitable vignetting is a painful process. There is also way more support for LR4 including on Nikonians.
Aperture was on the point of reducing me to using JPEGs with the D600, when Nikonians helped me see the light, as it were.
LR 4 smokes Aperture on skin tones and replicates the Nikon camera modes, should you want to use them. I find it is far better at fixing highlights and shadows too. With LR the dynamic range of the D600 is staggering.
Boxed!!! Who knew!!! and a few goodies, don't care for the software much but an extra 8GB card would get used. Thanks for the tip
> >This is not so much more than Aperture, and with Aperture you >would really hope to have to pay for an upgrade to Aperture 4 >some time soon
Yes I figured that, partly why I was sitting on the fence.
I downloaded LR 4 trail, I know my way around the app fairly well so I'll get my full 30 days out of it while I wait for my B&H order to arrive!
I never thought I cared for a GPS on camera, but now I see LR4's integration of Google maps I may rethink that. I do a lot of shooting in remote locations often of mountain areas I then feature in guidebooks. So I'm constantly searching for images of specific locations. Suddenly I can see that cataloguing GPS data could be a real boon.