Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
Thread started 24 Aug 2009 (Monday) 18:14
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Mac Users - Aperture v Lightroom - advice?

 
Analog6
Senior Member
Avatar
565 posts
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Terranora, northern NSW, Australia
     
Aug 24, 2009 18:14 |  #1

I am at the point of purchasing one or the other. can anyione advise which they think is best and, briefly, why.

It would be most helpful to me.


Odille
---------------
My Facebook (external link) / Photo Blog (external link) / RedBubble shop (external link) / My Calendars (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
crn3371
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,198 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2005
Location: SoCal, USA
     
Aug 24, 2009 19:37 |  #2

You can't go wrong with either one. I had the same dilemma and ended up with Lightroom. For me the decision was based on the amount of online and print support available for Lightroom as opposed to Aperture. Also, Adobe seems to be a little better with updates and new camera support than Apple. You can download free trials of both if you want to give them a try. Once you decide on one the best piece of advice I can give you is to just stick with it. All of these programs have a learning curve and I think the worst thing a user can do is to jump from program to program, never really mastering anything.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sf1
Goldmember
Avatar
2,021 posts
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Calgary, Canada
     
Aug 24, 2009 19:43 |  #3

+1 for the free trials....make up your own mind.

For me, I ended up with Aperture - it all came down to work flow, Aperture just suited me better.


Canon 5DII, Canon 1D Mark II N
Canon 24-70 mm f/2.8 L, Canon 85 mm f/1.8, Canon 70 -200 mm f/2.8 IS L, Canon 400 mm f/5.6 L, Canon 50 mm f/1.4, Manfrotto 055XPROB & 488 RC2
Canon Speedlites 580 EX, 430 EX II & 3 PW II, iMac I7, MacBook Pro, Aperture 3, CS5

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mark-B
Goldmember
Avatar
2,248 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Louisiana
     
Aug 29, 2009 02:15 |  #4

I switched from Windows to Mac last week. I am also considering a switch from Lightroom to Aperture.

After only a few days, I think that Aperture's layout, organization, and workflow possibilities are far superior to Lightroom. It is a relief not to feel restrained by Lightroom's modules. I can switch from projects to metadata to adjustments without ever changing the view of my picture. I can edit in thumbnail mode. There are far more keyboard shortcuts available to do many more tasks. All of Aperture's scrollbars and sliders have arrows to make minute adustments (I really hate that Lightroom does not have this).

On the other hand, I like Lightroom's local edit brush, non-destructive adjustments, use of XMP, advanced export options, and curves adjustments (as opposed to Aperture's levels adjustments).

There are a handful other differences that I am still looking into. For example:

* Lightroom's saturation range is -100/+100 and Aperture's saturation range is -2/+2. It is much easier to make fine adjustments in Lightroom.

* Lightroom's tint slider goes from -150/+150 and that is the limit of the adjustment. Aperture's tint slider goes from -50/+50, but you can manually type in -150/+150. That makes no sense to me.

For now it seems that Aperture is the best choice if your priority is workflow and organization. Lightroom might be the best choice you are more concerned with the editing tools and color output. Both programs seem very good. 30 days might not be long enough to decide.

Amazon list Aperture for $146 and Lightroom for $260 right now (08/29/09), so that could be another important factor.


Mark-B
msbphoto.comexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
zincozinco
-Followers of Fidget-
Avatar
4,420 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2007
Location: AndalucĂ­a
     
Aug 29, 2009 03:53 |  #5

Like Mark said I found that the interface of Aperture is much more user friendly, i guess thats an "apple" thing. I used the both in version 1 and betas and went with aperture for that very reason. In the end they are both capable of the same things more or less so its important that a certain program goes with YOUR workflow. try em out.


Living the life, overexposing...
Web (external link), Blog (external link) Name: Mike, Maik, Micke or just zinco.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mspringfield
Senior Member
Avatar
869 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 19
Joined Jun 2005
Location: Chattanooga, TN
     
Aug 29, 2009 07:11 |  #6

I ended up going with Lightroom several years ago. I have looked at Aperture on several occasions but just have not like the responsiveness. For me the real think that pushed me to Lightroom was the easy interface with Photoshop.

Michael


Michael Springfield - Chattanooga, TN
Canon 1DsMkIII, Canon EOS M, Canon 70-200mm 2.8L IS, Canon EF 1.4x II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
basroil
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,015 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2006
Location: STL/Clayton, MO| NJ
     
Aug 29, 2009 12:34 |  #7

Mark-B wrote in post #8542907 (external link)
For now it seems that Aperture is the best choice if your priority is workflow and organization.

Not entirely true there... It's an option if you care only for that, but LR2 offers everything Aperture does and more. File/Folder hierarchy mode in LR2 is better implemented than in Aperture, and keywords/collections are easy enough for LR2 (just press a key or push a button to search or add). Can't forget about virtual copies, image stacking, and a lot of other features most people just don't seem to understand all too well.


I don't hate macs or OSX, I hate people and statements that portray them as better than anything else. Macs are A solution, not THE solution. Get a good desktop i7 with Windows 7 and come tell me that sucks for photo or video editing.
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Todd ­ Lambert
I don't like titles
Avatar
12,643 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 132
Joined May 2009
Location: On The Roads Across America
     
Aug 29, 2009 12:47 |  #8

I use currently use Aperture and I really like it, while I've dabbled with Lightroom on several occasions and like it too.

Personally, I think the only major thing holding Aperture back is speed. It's a lot more intensive of a program than Lightroom. I'm hoping that with Snow Leopard and Aperture 3, this will be alleviated. If so, I will gladly stick with Aperture.

If Aperture 3 comes and it is still slower than Lightroom, then I am going to have to make a decision as to which way I want to go for the future.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mark-B
Goldmember
Avatar
2,248 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Louisiana
     
Aug 29, 2009 15:32 |  #9

basroil wrote in post #8544657 (external link)
Not entirely true there... It's an option if you care only for that, but LR2 offers everything Aperture does and more. File/Folder hierarchy mode in LR2 is better implemented than in Aperture, and keywords/collections are easy enough for LR2 (just press a key or push a button to search or add). Can't forget about virtual copies, image stacking, and a lot of other features most people just don't seem to understand all too well.

File/Folder implementation: Both programs allow you to import pictures into their own internal library or use the pictures in their current place on the hard drive. Aperture's Projects are the same as Lightroom's Collections. Lightroom has a separate view for hard drive folders. Aperture doesn't. This could be very important or completely meaningless depending on how you organize your photos from start to finish.

Keywords
are more easily applied in Aperture. Both programs allow you to enter them from a side panel. Aperture also offers a toolbar at the bottom of the window or a floating panel. Keywords can also be managed from the develop/adjustment mode in Aperture and they can't in Lightroom.

Virtual copies
are the same as Aperture's versions. Aperture gives you the option to create new master files or new versions. Lightroom only gives the option for a virtual copy.

Stacking is another strong point for Aperture. Both programs have the same stacking functions, but they are more easily accessed in Aperture. Stacks have their own menu in Aperture and they are a sub-menu under Photos in Lightroom. 6 of the 11 stack commands have keyboard shortcuts in Lightroom and 15 of the 15 stack commands have keyboard shortcuts in Aperture.

A lot of other features:

Lightroom has Previous Import and Quick Collection. Aperture doesn't have these. Too bad, because I use these all the time. Other than that, I really don't see anything else in Lightroom's Library module that Aperture doesn't do as well or better.

Aperture has a Light Table. Lightroom doesn't have this. I really don't see anything else in Aperture's Adjustments panel that Lightroom doesn't do as well or better.

Lightroom has the local adjustment brush. This is a great tool that Aperture does not have.

Lightroom allows you to adjust hue/saturation/luminan​ce by touching any spot on the screen and moving the cursor. This is far better than Aperture's eyedropper that changes the set of default colors when you use it.

Lightroom
has Auto White Balance. Aperture does not.
Lightroom has curves. Aperture has levels.
Lightroom has the dim/lights out feature. Aperture has a loupe.

Lightroom writes all changes to XMP files if you turn that setting on. Aperture maintains all edits in it's internal library, but has the option to export you master file with an XMP sidecar. Not as good, but better than nothing.

Lightroom has a history panel where you can see all of your edits. Aperture lacks this very useful feature.

Lightroom has a far better export function with many more advanced options than Aperture.


Although it doesn't have all of the tools that Lightroom does, Aperture is easier to work with and has a more flexible interface. Want your edit panel on the left instead of right? No problem. Want that panel as a floating window while you edit in full screen? No problem.

Want to edit in thumbnail mode? Compare an unlimited number of images on the screen at the same time. Go from projects/collections, metadata/library, and adjustments/develop without ever changing the view of the image you are working on? Lightroom can't do any of that.

These are some of the bigger differences I see as I toggle between the 2 programs, but I still have 27 days on my trial. I'll be following this and other similar topics to help me decide. I'm not loyal to Apple or Adobe, so that will have no effect on me.

-


Mark-B
msbphoto.comexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
johnj2803
Senior Member
869 posts
Likes: 2
Joined May 2009
Location: Miami, FL
     
Aug 29, 2009 15:43 |  #10

if you have an "older" computer.... LR wins. aperture is a real resource hog for the computer.

Mac products usually go well (really an understatement) with other mac products tho.


My flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sf1
Goldmember
Avatar
2,021 posts
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Calgary, Canada
     
Aug 29, 2009 16:26 |  #11

Mark-B nice write up and comparison.

Not sure if LR has ratings and smart albums - you can sort all photos in any project based upon the rating you gave them.

LR has a copy /paste, Aperture has Lift / Stamp. With Aperture, you can choose any or all of the items you want to Lift and Stamp. This makes batching rather easy. LR maybe just as easy, but I forget.


Canon 5DII, Canon 1D Mark II N
Canon 24-70 mm f/2.8 L, Canon 85 mm f/1.8, Canon 70 -200 mm f/2.8 IS L, Canon 400 mm f/5.6 L, Canon 50 mm f/1.4, Manfrotto 055XPROB & 488 RC2
Canon Speedlites 580 EX, 430 EX II & 3 PW II, iMac I7, MacBook Pro, Aperture 3, CS5

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wytwolf
Member
156 posts
Joined Jun 2006
Location: St. John's NL Canada
     
Aug 29, 2009 17:42 |  #12

I tried both, and I really wanted to enjoy Aperture. I did like just about everything about aperture except it's speed. I also liked how it linked in with Iphoto. The killer was the speed on my 2.0Ghz C2D black macbook, LR2 felt alot snappier. Plus Adobe has a lot more experience in photo post processing. Really you can't go wrong with either one. Who know if apple releases Aperture 3 that is less of a resource hog then I might switch.


Gear: Canon 50D, Canon 17-55 2.8 IS, Canon 70-200L 2.8 IS, Speedlite 430EX
2011 15" MBP, Aperture 3

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
basroil
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,015 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2006
Location: STL/Clayton, MO| NJ
     
Aug 29, 2009 18:22 |  #13

Mark-B wrote in post #8545406 (external link)

Virtual copies
are the same as Aperture's versions. Aperture gives you the option to create new master files or new versions. Lightroom only gives the option for a virtual copy.


LR has always had snapshots, which would be somewhat like versions.


I don't hate macs or OSX, I hate people and statements that portray them as better than anything else. Macs are A solution, not THE solution. Get a good desktop i7 with Windows 7 and come tell me that sucks for photo or video editing.
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wlescall
Senior Member
512 posts
Joined Mar 2006
Location: Northern Panhandle, WV
     
Aug 29, 2009 21:52 |  #14

+2 on the free trials.


Bill
EOS 5Dmkiii, Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 mkii, 580 EX II , Canon EF 24-105 mm f/4L, Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS
2 desktops & 2 laptops (PC & Mac each)
Chronon Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wmcy
Senior Member
703 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Porter Ranch USA
     
Aug 29, 2009 22:43 |  #15

The primary issue for me is the ability to make "local" adjustments - and I like to the ability to easily view before/after rendintions whenever changes are made. My vote is LRs.


Canon EOS R5, Canon RF 24-105 f/4L IS, Canon RF 70-200 f4 L IS, Canon RF 600 f11, Canon EF 17-40 f4 L IS, Canon Control Adapter, Godox V1 Speedlite Kit, Godox Min Speedlite

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,311 views & 0 likes for this thread
Mac Users - Aperture v Lightroom - advice?
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Mike1911
887 guests, 159 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.