Software considerations
Jun 17, 2012 16:19:11 #
I am an advanced amateur using Aperture 3 software on my iMac and am reasonably happy with the results and the filing system, on-line books, etc. What would I gain by switching to a more feature intensive program like Lightroom, Photoshop or Elements considering the costs and learning curve intrinsic in these programs?
Jun 17, 2012 21:41:35 #
If Aperture is working for you, then stick with it.
Lightroom and Aperture (IIRC) are close in the operations they perform. PS and PSE are full-featured editors; PSE geared towards Photography and PS for all digital art & design.
Lightroom and Aperture (IIRC) are close in the operations they perform. PS and PSE are full-featured editors; PSE geared towards Photography and PS for all digital art & design.
Jun 18, 2012 06:41:22 #
Here's a short take on the Aperture v Lightroom situation.
I just loaded Lightroom because I was not satisfied with Aperture.
Lightroom 4.1 seems to be a decent app, but it does not appear to be as easy to use as I had hoped. This criticism is admittedly personal rather than objective. So far so good. I resolved to learn Lightroom.
Then my Mac automatically uploaded an update to Aperture. So I gave it a try.
Wow! This upgrade really improves Aperture. What a pleasing development. This update to Aperture is fantastic.
Accordingly, my experience instructs that getting the latest version of Aperture is an essential first step in evaluating a move to Lightroom. Besides, the Aperture upgrade is free.
All the best,
Martin
I just loaded Lightroom because I was not satisfied with Aperture.
Lightroom 4.1 seems to be a decent app, but it does not appear to be as easy to use as I had hoped. This criticism is admittedly personal rather than objective. So far so good. I resolved to learn Lightroom.
Then my Mac automatically uploaded an update to Aperture. So I gave it a try.
Wow! This upgrade really improves Aperture. What a pleasing development. This update to Aperture is fantastic.
Accordingly, my experience instructs that getting the latest version of Aperture is an essential first step in evaluating a move to Lightroom. Besides, the Aperture upgrade is free.
All the best,
Martin
Jun 18, 2012 11:42:22 #
Thanks Martin,
That's useful information. I have Aperture 3; what is the update you're referring to and how do I download it?
By the way, I can recommend the Apple Pro Training Series for leaning the program: www.peachpit.com.
Thanks,
Bill
That's useful information. I have Aperture 3; what is the update you're referring to and how do I download it?
By the way, I can recommend the Apple Pro Training Series for leaning the program: www.peachpit.com.
Thanks,
Bill
Jun 18, 2012 12:05:41 #
Hello Bill,
It's version 3.3. I think it's available as an update "download" at the Apple App Store.
The big plus for me is that it lists all possible adjustments on the left pull down menu. When you select an adjustment it opens up to make the controls for the adjustment available at once.
I moved to this new version immediately after practicing a bit on Lightroom. My initial impression is to continue with Aperture, primarily because it permits me to use Photoshop Elements 10 as an external editor. PSE 10 interests me because I have a channel mixer plug in for it, which I need for IR work. Also, PSE offers an easy way to resize photos.
One big problem I've been having with Lightroom concerns accessing my plug ins. Interestingly, there's a bit of a jumble in this regard with Aperture 3.3. I think I'll have an easier time with Aperture than with Lightroom.
Please write anytime you'd like more scoop about software from my perspective. I've played with most of them, and never mastered any.
BTW if you're interested in plug ins for removing stuff from pics, e.g. telephone wires, fire hydrants, people and such, try Snapheal. I find it a marvel. Also, I use iResize quite a bit in conjunction. These are two splendid low cost apps that I'd not be without.
All the best,
Martin
It's version 3.3. I think it's available as an update "download" at the Apple App Store.
The big plus for me is that it lists all possible adjustments on the left pull down menu. When you select an adjustment it opens up to make the controls for the adjustment available at once.
I moved to this new version immediately after practicing a bit on Lightroom. My initial impression is to continue with Aperture, primarily because it permits me to use Photoshop Elements 10 as an external editor. PSE 10 interests me because I have a channel mixer plug in for it, which I need for IR work. Also, PSE offers an easy way to resize photos.
One big problem I've been having with Lightroom concerns accessing my plug ins. Interestingly, there's a bit of a jumble in this regard with Aperture 3.3. I think I'll have an easier time with Aperture than with Lightroom.
Please write anytime you'd like more scoop about software from my perspective. I've played with most of them, and never mastered any.
BTW if you're interested in plug ins for removing stuff from pics, e.g. telephone wires, fire hydrants, people and such, try Snapheal. I find it a marvel. Also, I use iResize quite a bit in conjunction. These are two splendid low cost apps that I'd not be without.
All the best,
Martin
Jun 18, 2012 13:14:56 #
Thanks for the info. Martin. I'm downloading 3.3 now (over 1 hour!). Aside from IR, what advantages do you find PSE 10 gives you over Aperture 3? Have you heard any G2 on Aperture 4?
Have you tried any of the HDR apps? I think there is a free one on the Apple site, but have heard that Photomatrix is the best.
You can re-size in Aperture by using the crop tool.
Best,
Bill
Have you tried any of the HDR apps? I think there is a free one on the Apple site, but have heard that Photomatrix is the best.
You can re-size in Aperture by using the crop tool.
Best,
Bill
Jun 18, 2012 14:04:30 #
shieldsadvert wrote:
Thanks for the info. Martin. I'm downloading 3.3 now (over 1 hour!). Aside from IR, what advantages do you find PSE 10 gives you over Aperture 3? Have you heard any G2 on Aperture 4?
Have you tried any of the HDR apps? I think there is a free one on the Apple site, but have heard that Photomatrix is the best.
You can re-size in Aperture by using the crop tool.
Best,
Bill
Have you tried any of the HDR apps? I think there is a free one on the Apple site, but have heard that Photomatrix is the best.
You can re-size in Aperture by using the crop tool.
Best,
Bill
I really really like Aperture - however, I have close to 1,000,000 pics being cataloged by LR and changing is out of the question. Because neither Aperture or Adobe can process all of the information that is available in a Nikon or Canon RAW file, I am now importing all files into NX2 Capture, making a batch color (WB) adjustment and then exporting as TIFF to LR. Adobe's RAW processor is good but it is generic in its reach...considering all the different camera manufacturers - having the ability to process each cameras RAW file would be a challenge. This is where Aperture fails as well. If you do not shoot RAW, it does not matter. Aperture is awesome!
Jun 18, 2012 14:23:13 #
Martin,
Hate to bother you again but I'm in a quandry. Aperture 3.3 require Lion and I'm not certain I want to do that. Should I get the new operating system or maybe just download a more recent version of Aperture than 3.2.4 if that's an option.
Would you expect Aperture 4.0 then to require Lion?
Thanks again,
Bill
Hate to bother you again but I'm in a quandry. Aperture 3.3 require Lion and I'm not certain I want to do that. Should I get the new operating system or maybe just download a more recent version of Aperture than 3.2.4 if that's an option.
Would you expect Aperture 4.0 then to require Lion?
Thanks again,
Bill
Jun 18, 2012 14:28:34 #
Good information, thanks. I expect to be shortly shooting in RAW and wonder if I couldn't use NX2 Capture and export TIFFs to Aperture 3 like you are doing with light room?
Thanks again, Bill
Thanks again, Bill
Jun 18, 2012 14:41:46 #
Bill,
It's a bit early for me to say too much more about the Ap3.3 other than it seems much more comfortable to me than Lightroom. At the same time, LR has a neat feel about it as well, but it has thrown me for a loop as far as setting up a proper file system for it. I bought a book about it that is as difficult for me as were the tutorials supplied by computer sellers in the olden days when bits and bytes were part of a foreign language.
The comparison so far shows me that plug ins are easier to deal with in Aperture and the file system is straightforward. LR's storage method is akin to a relational database, whereas Aperture's is more like a computerized index.
The photos I've been using for this test are primarily portrait type exposures of my Grandson. At first I thought LR was a smashing success in coping with skin tones. No sooner had I tried the same exposure on the new Aperture version than I found it to be a tad better. So, the safest thing I can say is that the new Aperture is the best choice primarily because it's free. Secondarily because it's familiar, and thirdly because it's easy on skin tones.
As to IR and Photomatrix I think there are better HDR choices. I've got an ap from OnOne software that does a fine job with HDR with one press of the button, which is what I do now. After doing the HDR I tweak my images a little more with any number of applications. Grant, I'm not trying to approach perfection in any of my processing efforts. More appropriately I simply like to mess around to see what I get. I don't print images anymore, choosing instead to show them on a 10x11" Kodak digital picture frame.
One thing surprises me about the images I see on UHH. Simply stated, many of the images I see posted look quite a bit like many of my own. I'm a true believer in the beauty of running water, for example, and I like to see the ripples and bounces in a downward coursing stream. White mush portending to be running water, seems to be a technical artifact far removed from the beauty inherent in natures landscape.
I digress. Suffice it to say I think Photomatrix is too expensive and I prefer the simpler solution offered by OnOne software--which is sometimes offered as a reasonably priced promotion. Speaking of OnOne, they sell a fantastic group of apps in their Perfect Photo Suite. It isn't cheap, but of all the add ons I've coped with, I like it best.
Speaking of IR, there's another approach I'd like to mention. There's an App named Elements Plus that plugs right into Photoshop Elements 8-9 and 10, which comes with a color channel mixer and other tools to boot. I think it costs 10 bucks, but won't swear on it. Nevertheless it makes the Aperture/PSE combo (PSE as an external editor) very hard to beat.)
I'm running down. Don't hesitate to ask for refinement on opinions posted above.
All the best,
Martin
It's a bit early for me to say too much more about the Ap3.3 other than it seems much more comfortable to me than Lightroom. At the same time, LR has a neat feel about it as well, but it has thrown me for a loop as far as setting up a proper file system for it. I bought a book about it that is as difficult for me as were the tutorials supplied by computer sellers in the olden days when bits and bytes were part of a foreign language.
The comparison so far shows me that plug ins are easier to deal with in Aperture and the file system is straightforward. LR's storage method is akin to a relational database, whereas Aperture's is more like a computerized index.
The photos I've been using for this test are primarily portrait type exposures of my Grandson. At first I thought LR was a smashing success in coping with skin tones. No sooner had I tried the same exposure on the new Aperture version than I found it to be a tad better. So, the safest thing I can say is that the new Aperture is the best choice primarily because it's free. Secondarily because it's familiar, and thirdly because it's easy on skin tones.
As to IR and Photomatrix I think there are better HDR choices. I've got an ap from OnOne software that does a fine job with HDR with one press of the button, which is what I do now. After doing the HDR I tweak my images a little more with any number of applications. Grant, I'm not trying to approach perfection in any of my processing efforts. More appropriately I simply like to mess around to see what I get. I don't print images anymore, choosing instead to show them on a 10x11" Kodak digital picture frame.
One thing surprises me about the images I see on UHH. Simply stated, many of the images I see posted look quite a bit like many of my own. I'm a true believer in the beauty of running water, for example, and I like to see the ripples and bounces in a downward coursing stream. White mush portending to be running water, seems to be a technical artifact far removed from the beauty inherent in natures landscape.
I digress. Suffice it to say I think Photomatrix is too expensive and I prefer the simpler solution offered by OnOne software--which is sometimes offered as a reasonably priced promotion. Speaking of OnOne, they sell a fantastic group of apps in their Perfect Photo Suite. It isn't cheap, but of all the add ons I've coped with, I like it best.
Speaking of IR, there's another approach I'd like to mention. There's an App named Elements Plus that plugs right into Photoshop Elements 8-9 and 10, which comes with a color channel mixer and other tools to boot. I think it costs 10 bucks, but won't swear on it. Nevertheless it makes the Aperture/PSE combo (PSE as an external editor) very hard to beat.)
I'm running down. Don't hesitate to ask for refinement on opinions posted above.
All the best,
Martin
Jun 18, 2012 14:44:02 #
shieldsadvert wrote:
Aperture 3.3 require Lion and I'm not certain I want to do that....
Would you expect Aperture 4.0 then to require Lion?
Would you expect Aperture 4.0 then to require Lion?
If 3.3 requires Lion I would think 4.x would as well...
Jun 18, 2012 14:49:00 #
mvyusmc wrote:
LR's storage method is akin to a relational database, whereas Aperture's is more like a computerized index.
?? LR let's you choose how and where you store your files - no system or methodology is imposed. You also have the indexing resources of the searchable key word database which is extremely useful...
Jun 18, 2012 14:51:27 #
shieldsadvert wrote:
Good information, thanks. I expect to be shortly shooting in RAW and wonder if I couldn't use NX2 Capture and export TIFFs to Aperture 3 like you are doing with light room?
Thanks again, Bill
Thanks again, Bill
You can....and I would suggest that workflow. I have the latest version of Aperture and I am running Lion.....I do not believe the newest version of Aperture offered any real noticeable improvements to the software.
Jun 18, 2012 14:53:02 #
sloscheider wrote:
?? LR let's you choose how and where you store your files - no system or methodology is imposed. You also have the indexing resources of the searchable key word database which is extremely useful...
mvyusmc wrote:
LR's storage method is akin to a relational database, whereas Aperture's is more like a computerized index.
?? LR let's you choose how and where you store your files - no system or methodology is imposed. You also have the indexing resources of the searchable key word database which is extremely useful...
So does Aperture and you can move in and out of libraries with ease in Aperture. If you change catalogs in LR, you have to close out of LR and open back up. LR needs to get that fixed.
Jun 18, 2012 14:58:26 #
stick with what you know and are comfortable with unless you want to dedicate a ton of time learning another software.
it doesn't matter what you use or buy.....there is always another program out there or coming that is better. people spend more time changing software and stumbling than creating.
it doesn't matter what you use or buy.....there is always another program out there or coming that is better. people spend more time changing software and stumbling than creating.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.