DPP vs Aperture vs Lightroom vs PS

Daniel Browning wrote in post #8822287
It's a matter of personal taste as much as anything else. Here's my take on a few of them:


.

• I like how it handles noisy shots better than Lightroom (with fine, grain-like appearance, instead of blotches).

What I have found is that DPP puts in some noise removal that you can't adjust, and Lightroom does not which by default makes the Lightroom RAW files noisier. Simply up the noise removal sliders to get the same noise processing. I have found the detail to be very similar too.

Tony-S wrote in post #8824598
Any edits on versions created within Aperture are data files (i.e., edit data, not TIFFs or JPEGs). So you can create many version of a raw file and each will only be a few hundred kb in size or smaller, depending on the complexity of the editing done. It's only if you go outside of Aperture do you get a new version that is a TIFF. It is hoped that Apple addresses this in Aperture 3.

That goes fro LR also. Any edits in an external editor (PS) or a plugin (basically an external editor) will be an additional file, either TIFF or PSD, your choice. Any edits performed solely within LR are simply data files contained within the catalogue.

I've not used Aperture simpy because my Mac didn't have a supported graphics card so I went the LR route & never looked back. Try both trials and determine your preference.

Can I do spot fixes in Aperture or DPP?
example - removing freckles or mis aligned hair?
Or is this only photoshop?

Another question..

what can DPP do that Aperture can't or vise versa?

Wondering if I actually need Aperture after the 30 day free trial?

You can (in a way) in DPP and LR. No idea about Aperture.

What do you mean "if I actually need Aperture after the 30 day free trial?"

Only you can answer that. That's what the trial is for: To try.

Aperture (and LR) are catalog based and offer DAM functionality. DPP is only a Raw converter. No more, no less.

Ok.. I have finally learned that there is NOT a program that is a good RAW converter and pixel editor.
Go figure trying to 'streamline' the photo process.

spcalan wrote in post #8835456
Ok.. I have finally learned that there is NOT a program that is a good RAW converter and pixel editor.
Go figure trying to 'streamline' the photo process.

Actually, Photoshop CS4 is a top-of-the-line Raw converter and the premier pixel editor. But, it comes at a price and, if your workflow is mostly around what you can do with a Raw converter (with a pixel editor "on hand") it might not be as efficient, especially when it comes to management and workflow issues.

spcalan wrote in post #8835096
Another question..

what can DPP do that Aperture can't or vise versa?

Aperture does everything DPP does and more.

kevitivity wrote in post #8840844
Aperture does everything DPP does and more.

I thought that Aperture had nothing like Lightroom's gradient tool and adjustment brush.

What is it that Aperture can do that LR can't?

hollis_f wrote in post #8843430
I thought that Aperture had nothing like Lightroom's gradient tool and adjustment brush.

What is it that Aperture can do that LR can't?

I thought so too, but it comes with a plug-in that does all that. It is called "Dodge & Burn" but it also has Sharpen, blur, saturate, haven't found gradient yet, but even Picasa has that.

In fact, once Picasa has localized edits, it is all over with.

Zazoh wrote in post #8844150
I thought so too, but it comes with a plug-in that does all that. It is called "Dodge & Burn"

Er, doesn't that work on tiff files, rather than raw like what LR does? You may as well call PS4 a plugin and claim all of its abilities as part of Aperture.

hollis_f wrote in post #8844345
Er, doesn't that work on tiff files, rather than raw like what LR does? You may as well call PS4 a plugin and claim all of its abilities as part of Aperture.

You are correct, Tiff. I'm not an Aperture fan, only in trial phase, it has a few cool things, but still doesn't cover end to end for me.

To me, one of the greatest attributes of DPP is it's simplicity. It can do just about everything I need to do to an image except level a tilted horizon. But it is not burdened with the many other chores that most, indeed, almost all, digital photographers don't really need to use - such as digital asset management and localized edits.

patwill wrote in post #8844483
most, indeed, almost all, digital photographers don't really need to use - such as digital asset management and localized edits.

Surely you jest!

patwill wrote in post #8844483
But it is not burdened with the many other chores that most, indeed, almost all, digital photographers don't really need to use - such as digital asset management and localized edits.

IMO, DAM is damn important
Localised edits: When counting vignette, just about all of my images have some localised editing.