New to mac

Just got my first Mac, (macbook pro).

I have Photoshop cs6 on the Mac.

I'm thinking of getting Apeature as well. And the Google NIK filters.

I am using CS4 on my old PC, with Bridge to manage photos.

So maybe I don't need Apeature? Just use Bridge? Anyone recomend Lightroom instead?

Would like some opinions please!

Also are there any discounts available on Apeature or Google-NIK ?

Thanks!

Om my rMBP, I run LR5 as the main environment for importing, cataloging, and doing raw edits. I also have the Nik suite as plugins. I dropped the expensive photoshop for inexpensive Pixelmator. On Mac I highly recommend LR, Nik, and Pixelmator.

I have Aperture, Lightroom, PS and Bridge.
Aperture is Apples answer to Lightroom, I prefer and use Lightroom, using either make Bridge redundant IMO. PS is a different tool than the others, it edits pixels after converting the RAW date to raster files, where as the others control how the RAW data is to be converted to a raster, changes are made prior to conversion. Having both gives you the most control, hence LR & PS work well together. Bridge is a file handling tool, both Lightroom and Aperture have their own file handling tools built in.
I prefer LR work flow and how it handles files and changes better than Aperture.

LR is superior to Aperture by far. I have used both for 5 years.

Depends on your applications. To sum up CS6 and Lightroom. CS6 is for the designer and Lightroom is for the photographer. CS6 can do far more like layers, actions and there is just too much to mention. Lightroom is down and dirty. Great for mass editing. Not like you can't mass edit in CS6 but I find LR easier to work with and file storage is much less. There is no need for TIFFS using CS6, LR remembers all your adjustments forever. Two years down the road you just open the files and export them. No need to even save Jpegs.

LR has a lot of bells and whistles. A local award winning photographer uses LR exclusively. You just need to get past the export page sharpening. Well I needed to because you have less control than with other software. With CS6 I can see the final product before saving for a client but with LR you don't see it until after the export has been completed. After I learned that the Pixel Genius group developed the output sharpening for LR and some testing I bought in. You can select a sharpening level and the type of media. I'm pretty sure there some special algorithms and edge sharpening going on in the background. I'm happy with the results.

In a nut shell when I am working on hobby shots or I need to do advanced editing I use CS6. For mass edits I use LR. The nice thing about LR is you can export a single image into CS6 for advanced editing and save it. It will export the edited saved image back to LR as a TIFF. At this point I just flag the original LR file, hide it under the TIFF so I don't forget about it. When all the edits are done I just select all flagged files (which are hidden), invert the selection which flags all the good images then select them for output. Works very well and there are different ways to do this.

You should try the free one month trial period.

I dropped lightroom and now only use Aperture, iPhoto and CS6. Aperture is SO much easier to use and manage than lightroom.

I've never tried Aperture. My Photoshop instructor was big on it but that was about 5 years ago.

ShotByTom wrote in post #16618340
I dropped lightroom and now only use Aperture, iPhoto and CS6. Aperture is SO much easier to use and manage than lightroom.

Interesting. What's easier about it? I find LR to be pretty dang easy to navigate and use.

Boone13 wrote in post #16618453
Interesting. What's easier about it? I find LR to be pretty dang easy to navigate and use.

I'm interested as well. It was a little awkward at first but once you learn to navigate through I find it is very simple. I love the export page. That has alone has cut my PP time in half. No more sharpening and resizing actions or batch processes in CS6. In LR I have presets for print/web sized images which include media type for each scenario. I love it.

Reviews of the newest version of Aperture stink. Many users seem to have switched to LR. I am using LR and love it. If you are using PS I think its a no brainer. (Full disclosure: I've never used Aperture but am a kool-aid drinking Apple fan since 1990).

LR 5 and MacBook Pro

Rarely need anything else.

(Best of all, you can order it now on Amazon for $102.56 with free shipping.)

jimmy_racoon wrote in post #16618539
LR 5 and MacBook Pro

Rarely need anything else.

(Best of all, you can order it now on Amazon for $102.56 with free shipping.)

The only reason I export to CS6 is I still can't get used to the cloning method in LR. I use it but I have way better control in CS6 for fine or multiple adjustments.

Not used a Mac since about 1993, and it was an old version then. Anyway from the impression that I get from the current Mac world, if you are using a full range of Apple iOS hardware, along with the OSX computers then the integration works much better if you use Aperture. All of the various iPhoto apps on the different hardware will auto sync with Aperture without the need to do specific exports. If you are only running OSX for image editing, and not syncing with other Apple hardware/software then there is little difference in basic functionallity. Many comenters seem to consider that adobe's PV 2012 has a significant advantage over the current RAW converter engine in Aperture.

Alan

Note that in forums such as MacForums...there see to be two endless whining topics: where is Apple Thunderbolt Display II.....and where is Aperture 4? Both were hoped/wished for at the Mac Pro release, to no avail. Neither are seen on the horizon headed our way.

ChinaVol wrote in post #16618025
LR is superior to Aperture by far.

Different, not superior. They both have their strengths and weaknesses.