DPP vs Aperture vs Lightroom vs PS

Instead of pro's and con's.
Lets forcus on what the programs cannot do compared to the other programs.

Trying to decide on which one to buy.
and yes I do have a Mac.

For me the big selling points LR2 has over DPP is arbitrary rotation and local correction.
I use those functions in almost all my shots so dont bother with DPP much.

The library functions of LR2 are also very handy. You can search/display shots based on lens, camera etc. Very good for finding things.

LR and Aperture are foremost DAM programs. DPP is nothing more than a RAW conversion tool and Photoshop is a pixel level editor.

LR and Aperture of course do RAW conversions and most other global image adjustments that Photoshop does. There is some pixel level editing available with the dodge and burn tools or healing brushes.

With Bridge (which comes with PS and PSE with the Mac) you may not want or need LR or Aperture depending on your work flow.

After trying demos of LR and Aperture and having Bridge and PSE I am going to buy LR. I'll still use Bridge for importing/culling because it's very fast for that and then use LR for image editing because it's very fast for that. I rarely have the need for PSE with LR.

Gene

Aperture and LR is where the real comparison is here. Photoshop is a different class of software.

Aperture and LR are both great and in the end you need to use what you find the easiest to work with.

Some things Aperture can do that LR can't...
1) Aperture will better integrate with your OS, use Services.
2) Aperture will make better use of your hardware (multi-core cpu and gpu)
3) Aperture is highly script-able and can be used with Automator.
3) Aperture print products...

Since we're on the topic of raw image converters, let me throw in a few words about Capture One here. It is by far the absolute best raw converter I've used, bar none. It seems to bring out a tremendous amount of detail that's blurred or just plain missing in the Lightroom or DPP conversions, with little or no color correction required in PS. I love it so much, I paid for the pro version to use with my puny pathetic 300D raws.

Yeah it can't do all the funky stuff LR can, but as a raw converter, it beats everything else hollow.

no wrote in post #8818923
=nopassword;8818923]Si​nce we're on the topic of raw image converters, let me throw in a few words about Capture One here. It is by far the absolute best raw converter I've used, bar none. It seems to bring out a tremendous amount of detail that's blurred or just plain missing in the Lightroom or DPP conversions, with little or no color correction required in PS. I love it so much, I paid for the pro version to use with my puny pathetic 300D raws.

Yeah it can't do all the funky stuff LR can, but as a raw converter, it beats everything else hollow.

Can you post pics to back up what you say?

tim wrote in post #8818961
Can you post pics to back up what you say?

I would imagine it's quite easy to post a wonderful image from C1 and a lousy image from LR. And it'd be just as easy to do it t'other way round to show that LR is the better raw processor.

Even if one were totally objective, there's the little matter of experience. I use LR a lot. When the latest DPP arrived I gave it a try and decided it wasn't as good as LR. Is that because it's a worse raw processor? Or is it because I don't have the experience with DPP?

That's why I recommend that people try a couple of different tools, for at least a week each, before making a decision.

I have tried lightroom for 30 days and currently use DPP and PS elements.

DPP does everything I need and I actually prefer it way it works to lightroom. You can't beat the price.

As for PS I currently only use it to add a black border and signature to my files before putting them on flickr. I will sometime fix a little spot in the picture but very rarely. I need to learn to use PS properly.

Well I downloaded the free trial of Aperture today on lunch.
I will report back later.

Fastfwd13 wrote in post #8820359
I have tried lightroom for 30 days and currently use DPP and PS elements.

DPP does everything I need and I actually prefer it way it works to lightroom. You can't beat the price.

As for PS I currently only use it to add a black border and signature to my files before putting them on flickr. I will sometime fix a little spot in the picture but very rarely. I need to learn to use PS properly.

LR2 can also do the boarders if you want it to

Can you do borders and cropping in Aperture?

Yes, you can do borders and cropping in Aperture.

Can you do selective sharpening in Aperture?
Like in PS - I can select just the eyes and add a sharpening layer to them?

No selective editing in Aperture, but LR has some of those features.

Just to throw another into the mix, at least on the Mac, check out RAW Developer. It's lightning fast and produces some great stuff. I've always used a combo of Photoshop and Aperture, but I am playing with RAW Developer and may use it for my RAW conversions and then Aperture for the DAM part of my work flow.