Aperture vs. adobe

I've been using iPhoto and do not do that much editing, but find myself needing to do more. What I have been doing is mostly cropping, exporting to pages then adding arrows, text etc for some training aids for work.
Been looking at adobe elements which is only 50.00 and aperture with is 200
Elements gets generally good reviews but some mac users have been very disappointed. I have virtually no experience with aperture but like the idea it is a more mac based type software. Of course, the 50.00 price of elements has its appeal over the 200.00 for aperture.
Any suggestions would be appreciated.

IMO, Aperture would be way overkill for what you need. I suggest you check Apple's video tutorials to get a feel for the "density" of the application...read a few of the other posts here and you also get some real-world feel for where it goes...
I also suggest that you check out: http://www.pixelmator.com/ a VERY powerful graphics package with an "Apple-like" GUI...the organization of the menus is much like Photoshop, but the feature set is aimed at photography (and some graphics)..the price is right at $59...I don't work for these folks but am very-satisfied user...IMO, it would be much easier to learn than PSE.
Good luck with your search.
cheers,
david

Similar Messages

Aperture vs Adobe Camera Raw

Hey,
So, lately I've been shooting in RAW and have finally found some time to process some of the images. I am a Mac user, so I have the option of using either Aperture, or Adobe Camera Raw (Lightroom). Can someone please explain to me the main difference between the two programs, in terms of their ability to retouch/edit RAW images. I've had experience with Adobe Camera Raw (through photoshop cs6) and believe it is an excellent piece of software, does Aperture provide the same kind and quality of tools. The reason I am asking is because while I need a program to help process the RAW files, I also want to organize them in a library where I can see my edits. I am currently using iPhoto and I like the way it works.
So to summarize the question, is aperture as good at processing/editing RAW images as Adobe Camera Raw? If not, why, what are the differences?
Thanks!

So to summarize the question, is aperture as good at processing/editing RAW images as Adobe Camera Raw? If not, why, what are the differences?
Much of the difference between the two has to do with the way brushes work (for local adjustments) and some features.
Brushes:
In ACR, the adjustment brush works as a multi-parameter brush where you brush in strokes and can adjust quite a few parameters after adding the brush stroke (e.g., exposure, highlights, shadows, sharpening, noise reduction, clarity, saturation, etc.). ACR adds a 'pin' for each new adjustment which can then be selected to change the parameters of that adjustment.
In Aperture, you use what is called a 'brick' which is a panel dedicated to the type of adjustment (e.g., enhance, highlights & shadows, edge sharpen, noise reduction, etc.). In this case, you use each 'brick' (or panel) to change the brushed in parameters for that specific type of adjustment.
In summary; you can add or change more parameters in ACR with one brushed adjustment than you can in Aperture, but both can add or change the same parameters (with the exception of exposure, which Aperture doesn't currently do as a local brushable adjustment).
ACR has arguably better sharpening and noise reduction control. ACR also has a gradient tool and lens distortion correction which Aperture currently lacks.
I do find that brush speed is about the same with a lot of adjustments added, with Aperture getting better marks overall.
All that said, I would be surprised if Aperture didn't receive some of the tools it currently lacks in the future.
As far as RAW decoding goes, Aperture relies on the OS X camera RAW compatibility feature to render RAW files, so you will already have a sense of what that default render is like with iPhoto and Preview. Aperture can alter those parameters either as a RAW fine tuning preset that you create or with the adjustment bricks.
FWIW, I have been using Adobe ACR at work (on Windows) since it's inception; and while I like the results with some images with regards to highlights, shadows, sharpening and noise, I can get there faster with Aperture. I also don't agree with Adobe's new rental policy for the CC line, so won't be investing in their products anymore. I quite like the 'App Store' paradigm.
Hope that helps.

Does Aperture use Adobe Camera Raw in any way?

Does Aperture use Adobe Camera Raw in any way? Is it important than I upgrade ACR if I do not use Photoshop?
Jerry

Thanks for the relies, guys!
I suspected that there was no connection between Aperture and ACR, but wanted confimation of that fact. You've answered my question.
Thanks again,
Jerry

Aperture and Adobe Camera Raw

I would love to set up Aperture to allow me to edit images in Adobe Camera Raw. I can open images from Aperture in Adobe Camera Raw by setting Adobe Bridge as my external editor, but none of the adjustments are saved in Aperture. From Bridge, I can also save the file as a dng file that Aperture should be able to read and save it in the numbered folder where Aperture placed the original raw image, but the saved dng file doesn't show up in Aperture. Apparently Aperture can't see any images in its own folders if it didn't place them there.
I also tried making my adjustments in Adobe Raw, saving it as a dng file and then importing it into Aperture. This is not ideal, as it would be convenient to do the Adobe Raw adjustments from within Aperture, but it does allow me to import the edits into Aperture. Aperture does something odd in this case. When I open the imported dng image in Aperture, at first it displays it with the edits I made in Adobe Raw but after a few seconds reverts to the originla raw image. I can't figure out how to recover the adjustments.
Can anyone fill me in on the nuances of Aperture in this workflow? Is there some way I can at least make the raw edits in Adobe Raw and make them available in Aperture.
Some of this may be my ignorance. For some reason, I have never been able to fully grok the whole version/master process in Aperture, never quite sure how to move between versions and masters. I suspect that some of my issues with the imported dng files is a version/master thing that I am not understanding.
I'm beginning to wish that I had set Aperture up to use external folders rather than place my files in the Aperture database. I think if I had done this it might have eased my current issues.
Is there any way to export an Aperture database so it exports the images into folders that correspond to projects and folders in Aperture? I suspect not, but . . . one can wish.
Any help with any of this would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
--Kenoli

Kenoli Oleari1 wrote
If this is what is happening, it means Aperture can interpret the ADR data, but chooses not to. If I could get it to use that data, it could solve most of my issues.
In the Adobe Camera Raw preferences, there is a section called: 'DNG File Handling'. You can (and may already have) select the option 'Update embedded JPG previews' and use the drop down to select either Medium or Full Size. The result should be (in Bridge at least) that adjustments you make in ACR and then either click 'Done' to save to the .XMP file inside the DNG file or click 'Open' to launch and render the image in PS for further work.
The result should be an updated embedded JPEG inside the DNG file that can be used by any program that can read DNG and is set to use an embedded JPEG.
In testing on my machine a couple of years ago on Snow Leopard, the OS X included program Preview did not show the updated previews though. It only displayed the original RAW data. I assumed it either was not set to show any embedded JPEG preview, or was simply not designed to be compatible in that way. Preview uses the same digital camera RAW compatibility function of OS X that Aperture uses. So it did not surprise me to see that it was not working in Aperture at that time. This was either a later version of AP 2 or early version of AP3, but I can't remember for sure.
It was my understanding that the purpose and function of dng files is so that raw edits made by any software could be accessed cross platform through the open source dng file. If Aperture simply chooses to ignore that data, it defeats the purpose of dng.
My understanding of DNG is that it is an archive type file made of (1) a RAW conversion which holds the decoded RAW data, (2) any .XMP file that has been created by the decoding software as well as; (3) ITPC and EXIF metadata and some other info such as ICC profiles and the JPEG preview. You can also opt to include the original RAW file.
I don't know the extent to which Aperture is designed to support the DNG file though. Does it handle it like a PSD file where it retains the full file content, but only supports displaying it in a limited fashion (e.g., no transparency)? Or should it actually read the .XMP data file and render it based on that info? I don't think this is the case as the .XMP data that pertains to adjustments made by another RAW decoder doesn't seem to be compatilble with the way Aperture is handling adjustments.
You could certainly test the embedded JPEG in a DNG file by making and saving some changes to the copy of a file in Finder and then comparing the original DNG to the adjusted one using the Preview program. If the changes are not shown, then the issue (or lack of one depending on Apple's point of view) is with the OS X digital camera RAW compatibility function (which they update for new digital cameras periodically).
If Preview does show the changes, you could then import both the original and adjusted DNG into an Aperture library (even a new test library) and see if it displays the differences. If it does, then this would point to an issue with sending a file from inside Aperture to an external program and then saving back (assuming this still fails to work as you expect).
Sorry I don't have more. I decided not to go with DNG and just archive with RAW and JPEG depending on what I end up wanting to do with the images.

Aperture & Final Cut compatible? Aperture VS Adobe Lightroom?

Aperture VS Adobe LightRoom?
I have 27" Mac Pro, 17" Mac BookPor & iPhone 4S.
I'm researching the two and wonder which would be best. I'm a Fine Art Photographer and have 3 years of a huge inventory of images all messed up in iPhoto and thrown into folders on my desktop. I dislike iPhoto soooo much. I'm in desperate need to organize my inventory so I can move on with my work! Help! Advice pu-lease.
Are Aperture & Final Cut compatible?
I have Final Cut Pro on my 27" Mac Pro.
I have PhotoShop Elements 9 on my 17" MacBook Pro. I want to stop using it.
Looking for compatible software to use with my Final Cut Pro.

What does "software to use with my Final Cut Pro" actually mean? Is it FCP? or FCP X?
iPhoto and Aperture are both equally compatible with FCP, but if it's the older version you use then you'll be exporting from your Photo Manager and bring the images into FCP.
If you have FCP X either will make images available to it via the Media Browser in FCP X.
So, no difference there.
Lightroom has no interaction with either version of FCP, so you'll be exporting from that to the Finder and then adding to the FCP project.
As for which is better - that's really personal preference. It might help if you explain what it is you dislike about iPhoto, and what you're actually looking for in a Photo Manager.

Side by Side: Apple Aperture and Adobe Lightroom in S.F.

Below is info on a first ever (?) head to head comparison of Aperture vs Lightroom presented by Schorr & Hogarty. Should be a great meeting. If you are in Nor-Cal, check it out;
March 13 in S.F. http://www.asmpnorcal.org/events/event.html
Side by Side: Apple Aperture and Adobe Lightroom
Speakers:
Tom Hogarty, Product Manager for Lightroom, Adobe Systems
Joseph Schorr, Product Manager for Aperture, Apple Computer
This Tuesday join us and the designated gurus from Adobe and Apple
for a lively evening as we jump headlong into both Aperture and
Lightroom and discover the nuts and bolts of how these applications
work. You'll learn how these programs were designed from the
ground up for media photographers from the guys who helped design
them.
Dual 2.0 G5 Mac OS X (10.4.8) 17" PowerBook 1.67
Dual 2.0 G5 Mac OS X (10.4.8) 17" PowerBook 1.67

Wow, maybe this is what Schorr meant by "VERY soon" in this post in this thread on March 10th.
"Actually, Apple has annouced that Aperture support for the Pentax K10D, K100D, and K110D will be available very soon.
We will also be adding support for 11 other RAW formats from different cameras, including the Nikon D40, Leica Digilux 3, Panasonic Lumix DMC-L1, Samsung GX-1L, and seven of the Leaf Aptus and Valeo models.
Can't publish a release date, but this update will be coming VERY soon.
Joe Schorr
Sr. Product Manager, Aperture
Apple"
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=4209290&#4209290
If so, as a Pentax k10D owner, I will be happily cleaning Lightroom of my machine and moving ahead with Aperture!
iMac and PB G4 17" Mac OS X (10.4.8)

Aperture and Adobe CS on MacBook?

I was recently told that I would have a hard time running Aperture and Adobe CS on a MacBook. It was recommended I get a MacBook Pro since it has a dedicated Graphics Card.
Is this true?
Have any of you had success running Aperture and Adobe CS on your MacBook? What were any problems you experienced. Do you think they warranted spending nearly twice as much on a MacBook Pro?
I appreciate your replies in advance! Thanks.

kristinecollier wrote:
Thank you so much for such a speedy response! I appreciate your help.
Now you have me considering a desktop rather than a laptop, too. I'd hate to spend so much and then not have an accurate display of what I'm editing.
Would you think the iMac would be sufficient? What would be an optimum setup in your opinion?
Well, you may find varying opinions here on this one.
You can and I do calibrate my MBP with a Spyder from Data color (which incidentally is as good as I've seen with the multi hundred calibrators).
But truth be told, I do any color adjustments and any tethered shooting via Aperture when connected to my 20" Apple LCD if I can.
Now, if you were to only get the MBP which is a fine machine i would get the matte screen for sure.
As far as the iMac goes, I have not worked on one but it's better than the MBP (even though it's glossy lcd). This is because it is an 8bit rather than 6bit color which laptops are.
I would suggest some hardware calibration tool(check Spyder by datacolor) but for the most part over all color accuracy will be with the stand alone cinema displays connected to the MBP or even the iMac and naturally a MacPro tower.
If you get the iMac just get the 24" as it's lcd is of a superior quality to the 20" iMac.
your best solution is what you can best afford so if say the MBP and the stand alone 20 or 23" cinema display or the Tower and maybe the 20" cinema display.
The stand alone Apple displays are very good especially when calibrated with hardware tool.

Using Aperture with Adobe Bridge: Can It Work?

I have used all the Adobe apps for ages and love them.
Photoshop and Bridge are a mainstay of our studio operation here.
I have been using Adobe LightRoom lately to deal with my RAW shooting.
I take it to a certain point with LR then I use Bridge to do other things with my files. LR and Bridge can see eachother's metadata and XMP info so they can be opened back and forth between the apps as need be.
This is critical for our work process.
What Im wondering is can Aperture be used in a similar way?
Can Bridge see Aperture's adjustment info and visa versa?
Do they read eachother's Metadata and or XMP info?
Does Aperture even use XMP data?
Reason Im asking this is I admire Aperture's interface and functionality.
I'd like to possibly use it in place of LightRoom for dealing with my RAW files.
But without the compatibility with Bridge it wouldnt work for us.
I read lots of Mac and Adobe publications and have yet to see this issue addressed in any articles.
Surely other people are in the same boat as me on this one...
Anyone have any knowledge to share on this matter?
Thanks.

Bridge and LightRoom can see each other's image adjustments because they are using almost exactly the same engine to do RAW conversions. Aperture and Bridge won't understand each other's image adjustments, in just the same way that Bridge and Nikon Capture, Canon DPP, Bibble or Capture One etc. can't.
When it comes to metadata you won't be much better off, as any changes you made in Bridge wouldn't be seen in Aperture unless you re-imported the file and vice-versa.
Basically, if your workflow is based around Bridge you are stuck with Adobe apps as they are the only ones designed to work with it.
Ian

How to import Images from Aperture to Adobe Bridge

It seems as if my aperture vault cannot be accessed from Adobe Bridge. As I ofter use the camera RAW it would be nice to assess the files in Aperture with the step of Export Master to Desktop.
Thanks.
Jack

after adobe bridge is installed. Go to aperture preferences. Choose export in the preferences apne then external editor. and choose adobe Bridge in you applications.
Works great and only took a day to figure out.

Bring back to Aperture from Adobe Elements 12

Ok I didn't have a problem bringing the photo back with Adobe Photoshop Elements 11 back to Aperture. I am having a problem with Adobe photoshop Elements 12 bring the photo back to Aperture. In Aperture preferences I am pointed to the Adobe Photoshop elements 12 app in the Support file.

What are your pref settings in Aperture e.g. what type of file are you sending to the Elements Editor Application? When you finish in PSE are you using Cmd+S or File >> Save to ensure the same file is overwritten and comes back into Aperture? If you incorrectly use File >> Save As it is more likely Elements will default to PSD. Effectively you would be creating a brand new file which never originated in Aperture and hence will not come back to Aperture.

Import keywords and ratings into Aperture from adobe apps?

Hi,
I'm currently using adobe bridge/ps2/pse etc as my main apps. I use keywords and ratings extensively.
When I import my photos into aperture, will I also be able to keep my current ratings/keyword tagging?
Thanks.

I also used Bridge/ACR to rate and add keywords to RAWS (Canon) and also used Adobe DNG converter to make DNG files from these.
No ratings or keywords have imported for any RAWs and DNGs. And, for some DNG files (which I can see in Bridge and iViewMedia), they cannot be displayed in Aperture. It's very strange since I've used the same workflow to create the DNG files over the past year. Some can be imported/viewed, some cannot be viewed. All originally from the same camera/RAW file. I've read in this forum that Aperture cannot read things like keywords from sidecar files.
I am hopeful that Apple will make DNG sidecar file import a big priority.
- Pierre

Nikon D70--Why is Aperture assigning Adobe RGB to my RAW files.

As far as I know, RAW files shouldn't have a profile until you give them one, but there it is in the EXIF Profile Name.
Interestingly, I thought it might be picking it up from the fact that I have the camera set to Adobe RGB for when I shoot jpegs, BUT, even when I set the camera to sRGB, the RAW files import as Adobe RGB, so it's got to be something Aperture is doing.
Since the Camera's native space would have to be truncated or compressed to to fit into Adobe RGB, and the space now has to be converted to be changed into any other space (eg. ProPhoto), I'm very concerned that Aperture is immediately eating some of the data from my camera.

Yes, there seems to be no way at the moment to choose which colour space to use when using 'Open in External Editor', and it's very irritating. But there's no need to save files outside Aperture and reimport - just convert to sRGB and save. If you are working with RAW files it makes little difference as Adobe98 is mostly larger than sRGB anyway. If you want to stick to a purely sRGB workflow in Photoshop then change the colour settings in PS to 'Convert to Working Space' for RGB files - no more profile mismatch messages - but I agree that it would be good to have the option to choose an output space for external editing.
A much bigger concern is that the EXIF data that you see in Aperture for an externally opened version is copied from the original, and you will see sRGB (for an sRGB original) listed in the expanded EXIF view, even though the file is actually in Adobe98 or whatever you converted to in Photoshop. Note that this is just the information you view in Aperture, NOT the actual profile in the image file. This seems to be linked to Janet's observation - RAW files (which automatically don't have ICC profiles) are automatically listed as having Adobe98 profile.
Other stuff:
An sRGB workflow takes up exactly the same amount of space as an Adobe98 workflow and can use the same file formats. JPEG v. RAW is a different question with different issues.
RA-4 is not based on sRGB - RA-4 was invented for the analogue film market - most RA-4 papers have an even smaller gamut than sRGB. It's just that the 'consumer' printing market pretty much standardised on sRGB as the default working space, regardless of the gamut of any particular printer/process.
Ian

Aperture or Adobe photoshop CS4?

Hi Mac lovers!
i love photography!, I currently own a D200 Nikon DSLR, I am an amateur photographer--- so should I go with Adobe CS4 which i have used in the past or should i give a test run to this unknown software (unknown for me) Aperture, I know this is a vague question but what i am trying here it is to decide whether I should go for something that is well known to all photographers (adobe CS) or what else _can you enlighten me_ about Aperture and considering it instead of paying $800 for Adobe?
thanks!

There is no substitute for Photoshop. Aperture is limited at pixel level editing. If I were you I would stay with iPhoto because it has decent editing tools and requires much less learning than Aperture, and buy PS4 for those edits in which you need to have some more capability.
Aperture excels in volume edits, culling, picking the best from a bunch of similar shots, producing multiple variations (b/w, sepia, crops) etc from the same image.... but it is very deep and not particularly forgiving. If you 'live' in it you will be fine, but other than that, stick with iPhoto. Photoshop on the other hand will still work with iPhoto being used as iPhoto's image editor. If you move away from iPhoto, start planning on where you will put your little camera videos as Aperture does not integrate video files into its database, that's for a general tool like iPhoto.
That said, I use Aperture for stills, have 80,000 images, and we use it at our studio. I use iMovie for holding the video clips from HD cam and from Pocket Canon. I use Photoshop CS4 all the time or doing real imaging work. It was hard to give up iPhoto but I use Aperture for the above mentioned functions so much that Aperture became the obvious choice. Aperture also supports some nice backup features such as it's ability to remember a hard drive (backup drive) that is disconnected, or held off premises, and then reconnects and updates when again connected to the computer. I believe this is something that is addressed at those who require secure backups (to insure their living!) and the importance of keeping off premises backups. Esoteric to some but having had floods, breakin's etc, it's nice to keep a copy of crucial images off site.

Aperture vs Adobe Photo Shop

How does Aperture compare to Adobe Photo shop? My usage is light mostly organizing and fixing personal photos with some usage for work in the engineering field.
Thanks

Aperture and Photoshop are two different animals. Photoshop is a pixel editor while Aperture does global processing and provides DAM support (digital asset management). The following are some lines I picked up (and edited) for other threads in this forum - hope they help:
Aperture is aimed at being a workflow for handling raw camera images doing mostly global corrections. Photoshop is meant for handling processed images mostly and allows you to do fine local adjustments.
Global means adjustments which are applied to the entire image such as tonal correction etc whereas localized corrections are something like removing a hair out of place, doing composite images, or removing red-eye.
I'd say there's a tiny bit of overlap between the two, but Photoshop was designed for graphic designers, and photographers happened to find it powerful for pixel editing of photograph files. Aperture is intended for photographers and provides the tools and a workflow that they need. I've found others say that they new need Photoshop only 5% of the time and that Aperture (or Lightroom - Adobe's beta, soon-to-be competitor) will do the complete processing most of the time.
- Pierre

Aperture vs Adobe Lightroom (Beta 3) JPEG exports

I've been beta-testing the Adobe Lightroom product and comparing it to Aperture. I'm using Aperture 1.1.1 on a MacBook Pro.
Lightroom has some intriguing features, but I've noticed a wildly different color when exporting the same image to JPEG format from Lightroom and Aperture.
I took the same RAW image from a shot I took with my Nikon D70 and exported a JPEG from Aperture using default settings with no color adjustment. In Lightroom I exported the same image to Photoshop, and then exported a JPEG with default settings and no color adjustment.
Look at the difference:
https://www.carsonmedia.com/projects/softballphotos/phototests/photocomparison.h tml
Can anyone explain the difference? Aperture seems to export a JPEG that resembles the original.
I'm perplexed at the difference.
--Brandon
15" MBP 2GB RAM OSX/XP Mac OS X (10.4.6)

Yeah, looks like a colorspace issue -- I'm guessing Pro Photo, but it might not be LR's fault. Last I checked, LR actually exports PSDs, not JPEGs, in Pro Photo space to PS. So 2 possibilities:
1. LR incorrectly tagged the PSD output, so PS doesn't realize it's Pro Photo.
2. You didn't do a colorspace coversion in PS before saving the JPEG. Try using 'save to web' in PS -- it usually takes care of the sRGB conversion for you. Does it look correct in PS before the JPEG export?

Aperture vs. adobe

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for