for the mac users - lightroom or aperture and/or photoshop

ThePhotoCollective wrote in post #7472516
lightroom all the way. sooo many benefits.

can you expound on this?

mutau052 wrote in post #7471291
It does not have all the features that aperture has but is so much easier to use and i would say on my machine at least 10x faster.

What features are lacking in LR and why is it 'easier to use.' I think i would rather wait longer at startup and get more features/adjustments than having to use multiple programs (which is slower).

Robert (TMR),

Thanks for the NAPP tip. I'd considered joining, but was concerned that the resources would be too Photoshop-centric. I love LR and will give NAPP a try based on your feedback.
Thanks.

Any more detailed feedback on the topic. Or links that my be helpful deciphering the major & even minor differences between the two?

Anybody using Lightroom in combination with DxO? I'm using DxO now by itself, but I'm considering getting Lightroom to complement it. Do I stand to gain anything from this or should I just try and get the next version of Photoshop/elements that is released?

Big boy photoshop is still a bit too expensive for my tastes.

Future Blues wrote in post #8597608
Anybody using Lightroom in combination with DxO? I'm using DxO now by itself, but I'm considering getting Lightroom to complement it. Do I stand to gain anything from this or should I just try and get the next version of Photoshop/elements that is released?

Big boy photoshop is still a bit too expensive for my tastes.

DxO is a Raw converter.
LR is a Raw converter with DAM capabilities. Not too much sense IMO combining it with DxO.

PS is a pixel editor. Totally incomparable.

If you want a cheaper version of Photoshop, there's always Photoshop Elements.

If you want a Photoshop-comparable program without the price tag and with some serious Mac eye candy - check out Pixelmator.

http://www.pixelmator.​com/

If you want totally free, but without being a true Mac application, there's the GIMP. It runs under X11, so it's fairly close.

lol i'm pretty confused..

I was using Canon DPP to convert and then PS elements to edit (on a PC).... (that was working out well)

Now i've got a mac and have Canon DPP, Aperture, Lightroom 2, PS CS4 and Photomatix at my disposal, im going round in circles trying to decide what to use but am thinking...

Canon DPP to convert RAW to JPEG (Canon must know best with thier own software right?)
Lightroom for all standard editing (I like the 'cut-down' version of PS)
PS for advanced editing if I need it (and once I've learnt how to use the thing!)
Aperture can sit there and do nothing (heard sooo many bad things I don't think I'll even give this a chance - had the software thrown in free)
(Photomatix for HDR!)

Friend of mine has just rubbished all the above and says use CS4 for everthing, but I know it will take me ages to learn how to use it as its a huge advanced program so think I've got a good combination

Anything above that anyone feels is wildly wrong?

Tks

NotAClue1 wrote in post #8610337
lol i'm pretty confused..

I was using Canon DPP to convert and then PS elements to edit (on a PC).... (that was working out well)

Now i've got a mac and have Canon DPP, Aperture, Lightroom 2, PS CS4 and Photomatix at my disposal, im going round in circles trying to decide what to use but am thinking...

Canon DPP to convert RAW to JPEG (Canon must know best with thier own software right?)
Lightroom for all standard editing (I like the 'cut-down' version of PS)
PS for advanced editing if I need it (and once I've learnt how to use the thing!)
Aperture can sit there and do nothing (heard sooo many bad things I don't think I'll even give this a chance - had the software thrown in free)
(Photomatix for HDR!)

Friend of mine has just rubbished all the above and says use CS4 for everthing, but I know it will take me ages to learn how to use it as its a huge advanced program so think I've got a good combination

Anything above that anyone feels is wildly wrong?

Tks

I have almost those software you have, what i do?

Always i use DPP for my Canon RAW or FlexColo/Phocus for my Hasselblad RAW, convert Canon RAW to TIFF always if i have further more pp, or JPEG if no pp, and Hasselblad RAW converted to DNG or TIFF.
I use Photoshop CS4 [I can use lightroom as well] to edit DNG and TIFF files.
I use Photomatix to work with TIFF or JPEG bracketed shots.
I never feel confusing which software i should choose, to simplify this more, i will start with the RAW converter of the manufacturer of the camera at the beginning and i end up with Photoshop/Lightroom for final edit or more pp, thats all.

Tareq wrote in post #8610358
I have almost those software you have, what i do?

Always i use DPP for my Canon RAW or FlexColo/Phocus for my Hasselblad RAW, convert Canon RAW to TIFF always if i have further more pp, or JPEG if no pp, and Hasselblad RAW converted to DNG or TIFF.
I use Photoshop CS4 [I can use lightroom as well] to edit DNG and TIFF files.
I use Photomatix to work with TIFF or JPEG bracketed shots.
I never feel confusing which software i should choose, to simplify this more, i will start with the RAW converter of the manufacturer of the camera at the beginning and i end up with Photoshop/Lightroom for final edit or more pp, thats all.

OK thanks. Maybe I should man-up a bit and start moving from Lightroom to CS4 as a standard. I imagine that when I get to a point where I am comfortable with it, i'll be able to do more stuff than just using LR...

DPP is a very capable Raw converter. It does some things better then ACR 5.2 or LR2 IMO.
However, it doesn't do some other things (well or at all): You cannot do local edits (say: Dodge & burn) or straighten an image, like you can in ACR 5.2 and LR2. So you will need to use some other software alongside with it. Like PSCS4 or LR2.

If you already own PSCS4, there's not too much reason to buy LR2, because PSCS4 does about all that LR does, except the DAM (Digital Asset Management) part.
(LR is catalog based, so you can also view images that are offline, for instance on an external drive that's off. Bridge is a browser, so you cannot view images that aren't there)

If you need that (DAM), then LR is the ticket.

However, for some edits, LR will not be enough. If you for instance want to combine multiple images into one (replace a sky or so), you will need a pixel editor: Photoshop.

I see no reason to use DPP in combination with LR2. I'd use DPP and Photoshop in that case.

I have tried using lightroom 2, aperture2, but they pale in comparison to DPP. Maybe I just don't know how to use them correctly but my RAW conversions in DPP blow away those from LR and Aperture.

I use The Gimp for other stuff if I need to.

All my shots in this forum are using DPP and Photoshop and Photomatix, no LR, also with Hasselblad i was using FlexColor to convert.